BEACH AND ORANGETHORPE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT. Initial Study. Prepared for:

Transcription

1

2

3 BEACH AND ORANGETHORPE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT Initial Study Prepared for: City of Buena Park Community Development 6650 Beach Boulevard Buena Park, California Prepared by: 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California November 26, 2007

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development Section Page Environmental Checklist Form...1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected...2 Project Description...3 Introduction...3 Project Location and Setting...3 Project Description...3 Anticipated Project Approvals...4 Estimated Project Schedule...5 Environmental Assessment Aesthetics Agricultural Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Hazards/Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance References...31 TABLES 1 Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-use Development Statistical Summary... 4 EXHIBITS Exhibit Follows Page 1 Regional Location Local Vicinity Conceptual Site Plan... 3 R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc i Initial Study

5 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development 1. Project title: Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed Use Development 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Buena Park 6650 Beach Boulevard Buena Park, California Contact person and phone number: Mr. Jay Saltzberg, Planning Manager Community Development Department (714) Project Location: The approximately 12.5-acre project site is bound by Melrose Street to the north, Beach Boulevard to the west, Orangethorpe Avenue to the south, and Brenner Avenue to the east. 5. Project sponsor s name and address: M+D Properties, Inc East Imperial Highway Lynwood, California General Plan designation: Tourist Entertainment, Low Density Residential, and Commercial 7. Zoning: Entertainment Corridor Specific Plan (ECSP), Single Family Residential 6,000 SF (RS-6), and Commercial General (CG). 8. Description of project: The proposed Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development involves the development of approximately 1,000 residential units within high-rise buildings, 355,000 square feet (sf) of retail, a hotel (300 rooms) with a possible timeshare component and banquet/conference facilities, and approximately 4,800 above and below-ground parking spaces. The proposed project would be developed in two phases. As an option for the first phase of development, one of the proposed residential buildings may be developed as an office building. Additional project description information is attached. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: The project site is predominantly flat with no distinguishing topographical features. Generally, the center and southeastern portions of the site are undeveloped. Residential uses are located along the northern and eastern perimeters and commercial and restaurant uses are located along the northwestern and southwestern corners of the site. There is also one single-family residence in the southern portion of the site. Single-family residential uses lie north and east of the project site. West and south of the project site are various commercial uses. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Orange County Airport Land Use Commission. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 1 Initial Study

6

7 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development INTRODUCTION The City of Buena Park is the Lead Agency responsible for preparing an Environmental Report (EIR) for the proposed actions relating to the Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development. This Initial Study (IS) presents a description of the proposed project, an identification of the actions required for project approval, and an evaluation of the probable environmental effects anticipated upon project implementation. Together with the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the Environmental Checklist Form, the IS will be distributed to any responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and interested parties as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING The project site is located in the City of Buena Park, Orange County, generally north of State Route 91 (SR-91) and southwest of Interstate 5. The project site is bound by Melrose Street to the north, Brenner Avenue to the east, Orangethorpe Avenue to the south, and State Route 39 (Beach Boulevard) to the west. The regional location of the project site is shown on Exhibit 1 and the local vicinity is shown on Exhibit 2. The proposed project site encompasses approximately 12.5 acres and is primarily vacant. This site also includes single-family residential uses and commercial properties. As shown on Exhibit 2, the central portion of the site is vacant. The project site is flat with no distinguishing topographical features, and on-site vegetation is limited to ornamental trees, grass and shrubs. According to the City of Buena Park General Plan (General Plan Exhibit 2-8, Land Use Plan: Central Planning Area), the existing land use designations for the project are Tourist Entertainment, Low Density Residential, and Commercial. Current zoning for the project site is Entertainment Corridor Specific Plan (ECSP), One Family Residential (RS-6), and Commercial General (CG). To better guide and stimulate the future success of the Entertainment Corridor, the ECSP was created in 1986 and was last amended in The ECSP is also known as the Beach Boulevard Entertainment Corridor. As shown in the aerial photograph provided in Exhibit 2, the project site is entirely surrounded by development as follows: single-family residential uses to the north and east; hotel, restaurant and commercial/retail uses to the south; and commercial uses to the west. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development would be constructed in two phases. The proposed project includes the following: up to 1,000 multi-family residential units, 355,000 sf of retail development, a 300-room hotel with banquet/conference facilities and a possible timeshare component, and approximately 4,800 above and below-ground parking spaces. A breakdown of the proposed land uses is provided in Table 1, and a conceptual site plan is provided in Exhibit 3. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 3 Initial Study

8 TABLE 1 BEACH AND ORANGETHORPE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT STATISTICAL SUMMARY Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development Phase 1 Phase 2 Total Multi-family Residential 681 units a 319 units 1,000 units Hotel 300 rooms/ 270,000 sf room/ 270,000 sf Retail 355,000 sf 0 355,000 sf Parking 4,000 stalls 800 stalls 4,800 stalls sf square feet a As an option, one of the four residential buildings in Phase 1 could be developed with office uses. Three to four residential buildings, with a maximum height of 184 feet, are proposed in Phase 1, and three to four residential buildings are proposed in Phase 2. As an option, one of the residential buildings in Phase 1 could be developed with office uses. This would represent a reduction of approximately 177 units in Phase 1 and the addition of approximately 195,000 sf of office space. The proposed hotel would be developed in Phase 1 and would be approximately 270,000 sf and include 300 rooms. It should also be noted that retail uses could be developed as part of Phase 2; however, the maximum amount of retail developed would not exceed 355,000 square feet. In addition to the proposed development, upgrades to existing utility infrastructure or installation of new utility infrastructure off site to connect to existing facilities utilities (water, sewer, storm drain, electric, gas, and telephone) may be required. Off site roadway improvements may also be needed to accommodate traffic generated by the proposed project. The need for new or extended utility infrastructure and roadway improvements will be addressed in the Draft EIR. ANTICIPATED PROJECT APPROVALS The City of Buena Park is expected to use the information contained in the Draft EIR for consideration of approvals related to and involved in implementation of this project. Potential actions to be considered by the City of Buena Park for the proposed project may include, but not be limited to: Specific Plan General Plan Amendment Zone Change Disposition and Development Agreement Development Agreement Owners Participation Agreement Community Facilities District Subdivision Map Other public agencies whose approval may be required include Caltrans (encroachment permit for roadway improvements to Beach Boulevard and possibly SR-91 and I-5) and the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (the project site is in proximity to the Fullerton Municipal Airport). R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 4 Initial Study

9 ke ST138 ST18 ST14 Angeles Los Angeles San Bernardino 15 tu 395 National ST173 ST Forest ST27 ST1 tu 101 ST2 ST170 Glendale ST134 West Hollywood ST2 Los Angeles Pasadena ST110 ST710 West Covina Rancho Cucamonga 10 Ontario Rialto ST ST187 Hawthorne ST107 Palos Verdes ST ST91 Carson Long Beach Pacific Downey Lakewood ST19 Project Location Seal Beach [_ Buena Park Westminster ST22 ST39 Huntington Beach ST60 Orange ST57 Anaheim 5 Santa Ana Costa Mesa ST1 ST55 ST90 Irvine Yorba Linda ST73 ST261 ST133 ST142 ST241 Laguna Beach ST71 Corona Riverside 15 Cleveland National Forest ST241 Rancho Santa Margarita Mission Viejo ST74 Riverside ST91 Lake Mathews 215 Lake Elsinore Ocean San Juan Capistrano San Diego Catalina Island San Clemente Camp Pendleton D:/Projects//BuenaPa/J002/regional.mxd 5 ST78 Regional Location Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development Initial Study ² Miles Exhibit 1 R:/Projects/BuenaPa/J002/Graphics/ex1_RL_ pdf

10 Kingman Ave Alley Stanton Ave Kingman Ave Fullerton Ave Manchester Blvd Whitaker St 9th St 5 10th St Pinchot Ct 11th St 11th St Sullivan Pl Athens Cir Melrose St Beach Blvd Brenner Ave Orangethorpe Ave Page St UV91 D:/Projects/BuenaPa/J012/site.mxd El Cerro Dr Project Boundary Poinsettia Dr Orchid Dr Poinsettia Dr Canterbury Wa Local Vicinity Exhibit 2 Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development Initial Study ² Feet R:/Projects/BuenaPa/J002/Graphics/Ex2_LV_ pdf

11 D:/Projects/BuenaPa/J002/Graphics/Ex_Conc_LUP_ ai Conceptual Land Use Plan Exhibit 3 Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development Initial Study Source: KMD Architects 2007 R:/Projects/BuenaPa/J002/Graphics/Ex3_Conc_LUP_ pdf

12 ESTIMATED PROJECT SCHEDULE Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the NOP/IS will be circulated for a 30-day public review. Following receipt of comments on the NOP/IS, the Draft EIR will be prepared. It is anticipated that the Draft EIR will be available for public review in April A 45-day public review period will be provided, after which responses to comments received will be prepared. Public hearings will be held by the City Planning Commission, which will make recommendations to the City Council. The project will subsequently be submitted to the City Council for its consideration. It is expected that public hearings regarding project approval will be held in Summer Based on the current project schedule, grading and ground preparation for the project is expected to begin in November 2008 with building construction scheduled for May The project is expected to be phased over a 3-year period, with the final phase anticipated to be completed by R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 5 Initial Study

13 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Beach and Orangethorpe Mixed-Use Development 1. AESTHETICS Would the project: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 1a 1b. The proposed project is located in an urbanized area of the City of Buena Park. There are no scenic resources in the vicinity of the project site. Additionally, there are no scenic resources that would be impacted by the project. The project site is void of rock outcroppings. There are trees located within the project site; however, they are non-native ornamental trees. The proposed project will include a landscape plan to vegetate the open space areas with trees, shrubs and grass. There are no historic buildings on site. Based on review of the City s General Plan Conservation Element and Caltrans website, there are no designated scenic vistas or local or state scenic highways within the vicinity of the project site. Further evaluation of these issues in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation measures are necessary. 1c. The proposed project involves the construction of high-rise buildings on a site that currently consists of vacant land, single-family residential units and various commercial uses. The Draft EIR will evaluate the project s potential impacts to the visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings. Mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. 1d. The project site is surrounded by existing uses and roadways that provide nighttime lighting. The proposed project would introduce new light sources into the project area. Although it is anticipated that light and glare impacts would be reduced through implementation of standard directional nighttime lighting and non-reflective building materials, this issue will be addressed in the Draft EIR and mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. Additionally, the Draft EIR will evaluate potential impacts related to the shade and shadow effects that the proposed project would have on surrounding land uses. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 6 Initial Study

14 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 2a 2c. The project site does not currently support agricultural uses and is surrounded by commercial and residential development. The proposed project would not convert farmland to non-agricultural use, and no portion of the project site is covered by a Williamson Act Contract. Additionally, based on a review of the 2004 California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, there is no land designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the project site (DOC 2004). The project site is identified as urban and built up land. No impacts to agricultural resources would result from project implementation. Therefore, no further analysis of this issue will be provided in the Draft EIR. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 7 Initial Study

15 3. AIR QUALITY Would the project: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 3a 3d. The proposed project would generate short-term, construction-related and long-term air emissions that have the potential to affect local and regional air quality. Further evaluation in the Draft EIR is required to determine whether this project will conflict with the adopted South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). An air quality analysis will be conducted to determine if the mobile and stationary air emissions associated with the project would violate any air quality standard; contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation; or cause a considerable cumulative net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment. The air quality analysis will also determine if the potential mobile and stationary air emissions associated with the project could result in exposure of sensitive receptors to significant concentrations of air pollutants. This issue will be addressed in the Draft EIR and appropriate mitigation identified, as necessary. 3e. The proposed residential, retail, hotel, parking, and potential office uses are not expected to create unusual or objectionable odors. No industrial facilities are proposed. Some odors may be associated with the operation of diesel engines during site preparation. However, these odors are typical of urbanized environments and would be subject to construction and air quality regulations, including proper maintenance of machinery to minimize engine emissions. These emissions are also of short duration and odors are quickly dispersed into the atmosphere. Any future on-site commercial uses (such as restaurants) which may emit steam are required to secure appropriate permits from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Compliance with SCAQMD rules and permit requirements would ensure that no objectionable odors would be created. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation is necessary. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 8 Initial Study

16 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially Would the project: With Mitigation No a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 4a. The project site consists of commercial and residential development, and a disturbed vacant lot. The biological resources present on the project site are non-native and ornamental. There are no sensitive biological resources present on site and implementation of the proposed project would not impact any candidate or special status species. Due to the presence of ornamental trees on site, there is the potential to support birds subject to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The MBTA prohibits activities that result in the direct take (defined as killing or possession) of a migratory bird (US Congress 2005). This includes the nests of all bird species, including common species such as mourning dove, Anna s hummingbird, and house finch as well as nesting raptors. With implementation of the mitigation measure identified below, this impact would be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. No further analysis of this issue in the Draft EIR is required. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 9 Initial Study

17 4b 4d. 4e 4f. The project site does not contain riparian habitat, wetlands, or any other sensitive natural vegetation community. The project site is within a developed, urban area and does not support any wildlife movement. No impacts to riparian habitats, wetlands, or sensitive natural vegetation communities would result from project implementation. Therefore, no further analysis of this issue in the Draft EIR is required. The City of Buena Park does not have any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. The project site is not located within an adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Mitigation Measure The following measure is recommended to avoid or minimize impacts on biological resources: Bio-1 Prior to approval of grading plans, the Community Development Department shall verify that the following note is included on the contractor specifications, which ensures compliance with the MTBA: To avoid impacts on nesting birds, the vegetation on the project site should be cleared between September 1 and January 31. If vegetation clearing occurs inside the peak nesting season (between February 1 and August 31), the Applicant shall ensure that a pre-construction survey (or possibly multiple surveys) is conducted by a qualified Biologist to identify any active nesting locations. If the Biologist does not find any active nests within the impact area, the vegetation clearing/construction work will be allowed to proceed. If the Biologist finds an active nest within the construction area and determines that the nest may be impacted, the Biologist will delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest depending on the species and the type of construction activity. Construction activities would be prohibited in the buffer zone until the nest is abandoned. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 10 Initial Study

18 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in ? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to ? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human resources, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 5a. A historical survey of the project site was conducted by R 2 A Architecture (2007) to identify any historical properties that might be present. This report was based on extensive site visits and review of the City of Buena Park s existing written and photographical resources. The historic survey investigation concluded that none of the existing properties within the project site represent or contain any notable historic architectural fabric; many of the structures have been substantially modified since their original construction. Additionally, no notable historic event has occurred at the project site. The on site structures are not historically significant (R 2 A Architecture 2007). Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation is necessary. 5b 5c. The project site is within an urbanized area. Much of the project site has been developed; however the vacant parcel within the project site has not been previously graded and there is the possibility that archaeological and paleontological resources exist at subsurface levels. The uncovering of such resources could occur during excavation activities for the project, which would include, but not be limited to subterranean parking. Potential impacts to these resources will be discussed in the Draft EIR and mitigation measures will be identified, as appropriate. 5d. The proposed project site is not known to have been utilized for religious or sacred purposes. No evidence is in place to suggest that the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section ) states that if human remains are discovered on site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to the Public Resources Code (Section ). As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no additional mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on site. No impacts associated with this issue are expected and no further analysis of this issue is required in the Draft EIR. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 11 Initial Study

19 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 6a.i. 6a.ii. The project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone as established by the State of California Division of Mines and Geology, nor is it close to a known active or potentially active fault. The potential for ground fault rupture to occur on the project site is remote. As such, this issue will not be addressed further in the Draft EIR. The primary seismic hazard for the project site, as with southern California in its entirety, is ground shaking due to the proximity of major active faults. Known active faults capable of producing strong ground shaking at the site include, but are not limited to: Whittier, Newport-Inglewood (Los Angeles Basin and offshore portions), San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust, Elsinore (Glen Ivy), and San Andreas faults. The closest active fault is the Whittier fault, located northeast of the project site. Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to expose people and structures to strong ground shaking during a seismic event. This issue will be addressed in the Draft EIR and mitigation will be identified, as necessary. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 12 Initial Study

20 6a.iii. 6a.iv. Most of the City of Buena Park is susceptible to liquefaction, including the project site, which has a moderate potential for liquefaction (Buena Park General Plan, Exhibit 8-1: Composite Earthquake Hazards). In addition, historic groundwater levels in the City of Buena Park range from 7 26 feet below ground surface. This issue will be further addressed in the Draft EIR and mitigation will be identified, as necessary. The project site is flat and no landslides have occurred on or near the site. The potential for landslides on the project site is considered negligible. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation is necessary. 6b. Implementation of the proposed project requires excavation for subterranean parking and would result in additional impervious surfaces on the project site, which would result in the loss of topsoil. However, the site is not currently used, and is not intended to be used, for agricultural or other purposes that require topsoil. Therefore, the loss of topsoil would not be an adverse impact. There would be minimal exposed soil following completion of the project and the potential for erosion during operation is remote. This issue will not be discussed further in the EIR and no mitigation is necessary. However, during construction activities, temporary soil erosion may occur. Short-term soil erosion issues that could result in sediment-laden runoff are addressed under the discussion of Hydrology and Water Quality (refer to Section 8 of this Initial Study). 6c 6d. As previously noted, the project site is located in an area with moderate liquefaction susceptibility. A preliminary geotechnical investigation will be prepared for the project to address this issue, as well as other conditions that could result in unstable soils. It is expected that adherence to the applicable provisions of the City s Building Code and recommendations contained in the geotechnical investigation will reduce potential impacts associated with soil conditions. However, this issue will be further addressed in the Draft EIR and mitigation identified, as necessary. 6e. Project development would be connected to the municipal sewer system for disposal of wastewater. No septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems would be required. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation is necessary. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 13 Initial Study

21 7. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter-mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 7a. The proposed project consists of residential, retail, hotel, parking, and potential office uses. These uses typically do not generate hazardous emissions, nor do they involve the routine use, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials used on site would consist of common commercial cleansers, solvents, paints, and other janitorial materials. Hazardous materials used during construction would be transported, used, stored and disposed according to applicable City, State, and federal regulations. New development will adhere to the City, State, and federal regulations. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation is necessary. 7b. During the construction phase of the project, there is a risk of accidental release of hazardous materials such as asbestos, lead, gasoline, oil, or other fluids in the operation and maintenance of construction equipment. Compliance with the City Municipal Code and standard State and local construction requirements would R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 14 Initial Study

22 reduce the risk of any damage or injury from these potential hazards; this issue will be addressed in the Draft EIR and mitigation identified, as necessary. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted to characterize the existing conditions on one parcel of the project site: the Franklin Motel. The Phase I ESA addressed known and suspected contamination sites, including a leaking underground storage tank (LUST) located immediately adjacent to and south of the Motel (on the proposed project site) (SCS Engineers, 2007). Based on this ESA, areas of environmental concern were identified. A Soil Vapor Investigation was conducted by SCS Engineers in July Low concentrations of chloroform, toluene, and total xylenes were found. The Soil Vapor Investigation concluded that there are no recognized environmental conditions at the Franklin Motel site and that no further investigation is required for that issue. The Phase I ESA did identify that due to the construction date of the existing on-site buildings there is the potential for asbestos-containing materials and lead based paint to be present. A Phase I ESA will be conducted for the entire project site and if necessary, a Phase II ESA will also be prepared. The Draft EIR will address the potential impacts associated with asbestos-containing materials, lead-based paint, and all other possible hazards identified in the ESA(s), and mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. 7c. There are three schools located within 0.25 mile of the project site. Saint Pius V School is located 0.1 mile west of the project site; Grand Avenue School is located 0.15 mile to the northwest; and Mabel L. Pendleton School is located 0.25 mile southeast of the project site. The operation of the proposed residential, retail, hotel, parking, and potential office uses would involve the transport, storage, and sale of various hazardous materials, such as petroleum products, pesticides, fertilizers, and other products such as paint, solvents, and cleaning products. However, these uses would not involve the use, storage, handling, transport, or emission of these hazardous materials in a manner or quantity that would result in a risk to the schools identified above. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation measures are necessary. 7d. The Franklin Motel Phase I ESA also included review of a computer-generated regulatory database search which concluded that the project site is not an identified hazardous materials site. There were 27 listed sites in proximity to the project site (within 0.25 mile); however, it was concluded that none of these are known to have any contamination at this time and they do not pose a hazard to the proposed project. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation is necessary. 7e. Fullerton Municipal Airport is approximately 0.95 mile northeast of the project site. The Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the Fullerton Municipal Airport was adopted in December 2002 (Updated in November 2004) and provides required standards for land uses in the airport vicinity. The Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) uses Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 entitled Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace for establishing building height restriction standards. The relationship of the proposed project (which includes buildings as high as 150 feet in the northeastern corner and 184 feet in the southwestern corner) to the airport and applicable regulations will be addressed in the Draft EIR and mitigation measures identified, as necessary. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 15 Initial Study

23 7f. The project site is not located near a private airstrip. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation is necessary. 7g. The proposed project may temporarily impact existing roadways during construction. However, steps would be taken so that implementation of the Emergency Evacuation Routes would not be impacted (General Plan Exhibit 8-4, Public Emergency Facilities and Related Infrastructure). Emergency access to the site would be provided in compliance with applicable City requirements. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation is necessary. 7h. The project site is located in an urban area of the City of Buena Park and is not adjacent to wildlands. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Further evaluation in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation measures are necessary. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 16 Initial Study

24 8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onsite or offsite? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 8a & 8f. The City of Buena Park, including the project site, is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). A large portion of the project site is currently undeveloped (refer to Exhibit 2) and implementation of the project would result in an increase in the amount of impervious surfaces on site, which would increase the amount of storm water runoff. This runoff would carry typical urban pollutants from the site, and could discharge into the local and regional drainage system (including Fullerton Creek, a concrete channel, to the north of the site which eventually flows into Coyote Creek). Additionally, the proposed project could result in short-term construction impacts to surface water quality from grading R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 17 Initial Study

25 and other construction-related activities (e.g., erosion, spills, and leaks due to construction equipment). The Draft EIR will describe current water quality conditions and will provide an analysis of potential short-term and long-term water quality impacts associated with the proposed uses. Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit requirements, which includes implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The Draft EIR will address compliance with these regulations. As previously noted, there is a high groundwater table in the vicinity of the project site. Dewatering, a possible remedy for the contaminated soils and high groundwater table, may violate waste discharge requirements and require an NPDES permit. This issue will be further examined and appropriate mitigation identified in the Draft EIR. 8b. Domestic water service to the proposed project would be provided by the City of Buena Park Water Utility. The proposed project site is in a developed, urban area and would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. With the exception of landscape areas, the project site will be developed with an impervious surface. The increase in impervious surface area will be less than significant related to groundwater resources because the site is not on a groundwater recharge zone. Dewatering may occur during construction and could temporarily affect the groundwater level in immediately adjacent areas; however, construction and operational activities would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in the aquifer volume or lowering of the local groundwater table level. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation is necessary. 8c 8d. The project site is located in an urban setting and there are no natural streams or rivers within or in proximity to the project site. Runoff from the project site currently flows into the public storm drain system. Following completion of the project construction, the project site would consist largely of impervious surfaces. Limited undeveloped areas on site would consist of landscaped areas that would not result in a substantial increase in the amount of erosion or sedimentation from the site after construction is complete. The amount and rate of runoff from the project site may be altered. Further evaluation of this issue and the potential for flooding on or off site will be addressed in the Draft EIR, and mitigation will be identified as necessary. 8e. As noted above, a portion of the site is currently undeveloped and runoff from the project site currently flows into municipal storm drains. The proposed project would include a system of underground storm drains, which would convey project runoff to the existing storm drain system. There may be an increase in the amount of runoff from the site and improvements to the existing facilities (including off site drainage facilities) may be required. Any new facilities will be designed to control the increased runoff in a manner consistent with the requirements for flood control and water quality. Potential adverse impacts related to capacity of existing drainage facilities due to an increase in surface water runoff from the project will be addressed in the Draft EIR, and mitigation will be identified as necessary. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 18 Initial Study

26 8g 8h. The majority of the project site is not located in an area identified as a 100-year flood hazard area (City of Buena Park General Plan, Exhibit 8-2, Composite Flood Hazards Map), and would not expose people or structures to flooding. However, a small portion of the site (northwest corner) is within the identified 100-year flood hazard area. This issue will be further addressed in the Draft EIR and appropriate mitigation measure and regulations will be identified, as necessary. 8i. The project site is located in the Brea Dam/Carbon Canyon Inundation Zone. This issue will be further addressed in the Draft EIR and appropriate mitigation and regulations will be identified, as necessary. 8j. There are no water bodies in proximity to the project site that would subject the site to hazards from a seiche or tsunami. There are no hillside areas within the project vicinity that would generate mudflow. Further evaluation of these issues in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation necessary. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 19 Initial Study

27 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 9a. The project site is surrounded by highways and urban land uses and will represent a continuation of existing urban development. However, implementation of the proposed project would physically change the currently established residential community by removing existing single family homes and introducing a more intense level of development. Further evaluation of this issue will be addressed in the Draft EIR. 9b. The City of Buena Park General Plan was adopted in 1994 and was revised to reflect adopted General Plan Amendments in The current General Plan land use designation for the project site is Tourist Entertainment, Low Density Residential, and Commercial. Current zoning for the project site is Entertainment Corridor Specific Plan (ECSP), Single Family Residential 6,000 SF (RS6) and Commercial General (CG). The proposed project involves implementation of a Specific Plan with proposed uses to be developed in two phases. The proposed project s consistency with relevant goals and policies outlined in the City s General Plan will be addressed in the Draft EIR. 9c. The project site is located in a developed, urban area and is not adjacent to any areas with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans. Further evaluation in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation measures are necessary. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 20 Initial Study

28 10. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 10a 10b. Based on review of the Department of Conservation California Geological Survey s Aggregate Availability in California Map (December 2006) and the City s General Plan the California Division of Mines and Geology does not identify any significant mineral aggregate resource areas (SMARA) within City boundaries. (DOC CGS 2006; Buena Park 1994, as amended, page 6-4). There are no mineral resources in the project area; for this reason, development of the project site would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Therefore, there would be no loss of mineral resources or of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. No further analysis of this issue is necessary in the Draft EIR. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 21 Initial Study

29 11. NOISE Would the project result in: Potentially With Mitigation No a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Explanation of Checklist Answers: 11a 11d. The proposed project would generate an increase in noise levels on both a shortterm and long-term basis. The proposed project would increase ambient noise levels during construction (construction vehicular traffic, excavation, grading, and building construction), and would also result in groundborne vibration if pile driving is required. Long-term operation of land uses proposed at the project site would increase the ambient noise levels due to increased traffic on local roadways and on-site uses. Short-term and long-term noise impacts will be evaluated in the Draft EIR and mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. 11e. As noted previously, the Fullerton Municipal Airport is approximately 0.95 mile northeast of the project site. Despite the proximity of the site to the airport, the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Fullerton Municipal Airport indicates that the project site is located outside the 60 CNEL noise contour; therefore, aircraft overflights do not significantly contribute to the noise environment and would not subject future project residents to excessive noise levels. No further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is necessary. 11f. The project site is not located near a private airstrip. Further evaluation of this issue in the Draft EIR is not required and no mitigation measures are necessary. R:\Projects\BuenaPa\J002\IS-NOP\Initial Study doc 22 Initial Study