IV. Environmental Impact Analysis L.3 Utilities and Service Systems Solid Waste

Transcription

1 IV. Environmental Impact Analysis L.3 Utilities and Service Systems Solid Waste 1. Introduction This section of the Draft EIR analyzes the Project s potential impacts on solid waste facilities. The analysis describes existing solid waste facilities and their associated capacities, estimates the amount of solid waste that would be generated during Project construction and operation, and evaluates whether existing and planned solid waste facilities could accommodate expected Project-generated waste. An assessment of the Project s consistency with applicable solid waste regulations is also included in this section. This analysis is based in part on the County of Los Angeles Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan 2012 Annual Report prepared by the County of Los Angeles (County) Department of Public Works in August Environmental Setting a. Regulatory Framework The following section describes the primary regulatory requirements regarding solid waste disposal. For a discussion of the regulatory requirements regarding the use, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes, please refer to Section IVJ, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this Draft EIR. (1) State (a) California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (Assembly Bill [AB] 939) and the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991, as amended, were enacted to reduce, recycle, and reuse solid waste generated in the State to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, AB 939 required city and county jurisdictions to identify an implementation schedule to divert 50 percent of the total waste stream from landfill disposal by AB 939 also requires each city and county to promote source Page IV.L.3-1

2 reduction, recycling, and safe disposal or transformation. Cities and counties are required to maintain the 50 percent diversion specified by AB 939 past the year AB 939 further requires each city and county to conduct a Solid Waste Generation Study and to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element to describe how it would reach the goals. The Source Reduction and Recycling Element contains programs and policies for fulfillment of the goals of AB 939, including the above-noted diversion goals, and must be updated annually to account for changing market and infrastructure conditions. As projects and programs are implemented, the characteristics of the waste stream, the capacities of the current solid waste disposal facilities, and the operational status of those facilities are upgraded, as appropriate. California cities and counties are required to submit annual reports to CalRecycle to update their progress toward the AB 939 goals (i.e., source reduction, recycling and composting, and environmentally safe land disposal). 1,2 In 2008 pursuant to the Per Capita Disposal Measurement System Act (Senate Bill 1016), CalRecycle implemented a new per capita disposal and goal measurement system that changes the emphasis from an estimated diversion measurement to an actual disposal measurement factor and evaluates program implementation efforts. 3,4 As a result, the IWMA s 50 percent diversion requirement is now measured in terms of per capita disposal expressed as pounds per person per day. Every two or four years, depending on the previous review s findings, each jurisdiction must go through a Jurisdiction Review in which CalRecycle may find that a jurisdiction has adequately implemented its diversion programs and has achieved the 50-percent equivalent per capita disposal requirement, or make certain other findings. 5 For CalRecycle is shorthand for the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, a new department within the California Natural Resources Agency that administers programs formerly managed by the State s Integrated Waste Management Board and Division of Recycling. California Public Resources Code, Senate Bill 1016 codified CalRecycle s historical approach by more explicitly focusing on program implementation, as well as implementing a simplified metric based on per capita disposal and changing the frequency of some reviews. The law now states that the annual per capita disposal rate is not determinative of jurisdiction compliance, but is only one factor among several that CalRecycle will use to evaluate diversion program implementation. Source: CalRecycle website, Local Government Central, CalRecycle Jurisdiction Reviews, accessed May 1, CalRecycle, Local Government Central, Goal Measurement, GoalMeasure/Default.htm, accessed May 1, correspondence with Jennifer Wallin, Manager, Materials, Markets, and Local Assistance Division, CalRecycle, August 13, Page IV.L.3-2

3 the most recent Jurisdiction Review covering the time period , the City of Pasadena (City) achieved its 50 percent equivalent per capita disposal requirement. 6 (b) Assembly Bill 1327 California Solid Waste Reuse and the Recycling Access Act of 1991 The California Solid Waste Reuse and the Recycling Access Act of 1991 (AB 1327) is codified in Public Resources Code Sections As amended, AB 1327 requires each local jurisdiction to adopt an ordinance requiring commercial, industrial, or institutional building, marina, or residential buildings having five or more living units to provide an adequate storage area for the collection and removal of recyclable materials. The size of these storage areas are to be determined by the appropriate jurisdictions ordinance. If no such ordinance exists in the jurisdiction, the CalRecycle model ordinance shall take effect. Pursuant to AB 1327, the City approved Chapter of the Pasadena Municipal Code, discussed below. (c) Senate Bill 1374 Construction and Demolition Waste Materials Diversion Requirements Passed in 2002, the Construction and Demolition Waste Materials Diversion Requirements (SB 1374) added Public Resources Code Section SB 1374 requires that jurisdictions include in their annual AB 939 report a summary of the progress made in diverting construction and demolition waste. The legislation also required that CalRecycle adopt a model ordinance for diverting 50 to 75 percent of all construction and demolition waste from landfills. (d) Zero Waste California Zero Waste California is a State program launched by CalRecycle in 2002 to promote a new vision for the management of solid waste. Zero Waste provides that wasting resources is inefficient and that the efficient use of natural resources should be achieved. The concept requires maximizing existing recycling and reuse efforts, while ensuring that products are designed for the environment and have the potential to be repaired, reused, or recycled. The Zero Waste California program promotes the goals of market development, recycled product procurement, and research and development of new and sustainable technologies. 6 Note that the City s Annual Report has not been formally presented to, or approved by CalRecycle. Thus, the City s compliance status has not yet been finalized. CalRecycle, Countywide, Regionwide, and Statewide Jurisdiction/Disposal Progress Report, Selection for Los Angeles County, Report Year 2011, accessed May 1, Page IV.L.3-3

4 (e) California Green Building Standards (CALGreen Code) IV.L.3 Utilities and Services Solid Waste The California Green Building Standards Code, referred to as the CALGreen Code, sets minimum standards requiring new structures to minimize the State s overall carbon output. California now requires that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant-emitting finish materials. 7 Each local jurisdiction still retains the administrative authority to exceed the new CALGreen standards. The 2013 CALGreen Code became effective January 1, As described below, the City has adopted an ordinance adopting the 2013 CALGreen Code. (f) California s 75-Percent Recycling Goal Assembly Bill 341 directed that no less than 75 percent of solid waste generated in California be source reduced, recycled, or composted by 2020, and required CalRecycle to provide a report to the Legislature that recommends strategies to achieve the policy goal by January 1, AB 341 also mandates local jurisdictions to implement commercial recycling by July 1, (2) Regional (a) Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Plan The County Integrated Waste Management Plan, approved by the County Integrated Waste Management Board on June 23, 1999, is a set of planning documents that provides a regional approach for the management of solid waste through source reduction, recycling and composting, and environmentally safe transformation and disposal. The County Integrated Waste Management Plan recognizes that landfills will remain an integral part of the County s solid waste management system in the foreseeable future and assures that the waste management practices of cities and other jurisdictions in the County are consistent with the solid waste diversion goals of AB 939. The County Integrated Waste Management Plan includes the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Summary Plan (Summary Plan), which was approved by the County Integrated Waste Management Board on June 23, Pursuant to AB 939, the Summary Plan describes the actions to be taken to achieve the mandated waste diversion 7 8 California Building Standards Commission, The CALGreen Story, CALGreen/The-CALGreen-Story.pdf, accessed April 30, Building Standards Commission, CALGreen, accessed April 30, Page IV.L.3-4

5 goals of AB 939. The Summary Plan establishes Countywide goals and objectives for integrated waste management; establishes an administrative structure for preparing and managing the Summary Plan; describes the Countywide system of governmental solid waste management infrastructure; describes the current system of solid waste management in the County and associated cities; summarizes the types of solid waste programs; describes programs that could be consolidated or coordinated Countywide; and analyzes how these Countywide programs are to be financed. In accordance with AB 939, the County has included a Countywide Siting Element in the County Integrated Waste Management Plan. The Countywide Siting Element identifies goals, policies, and strategies that provide for the proper planning and siting of solid waste disposal and transformation facilities for the next 15 years. The Siting Element was approved by the County Integrated Waste Management Board on June 24, 1998, and provides strategies and establishes siting criteria for evaluating the development of needed disposal and transformation facilities. The County is currently in the process of updating the Siting Element to reflect the most recent information regarding remaining landfill disposal capacity and the County s current strategy for maintaining adequate disposal capacity. The updated Siting Element is anticipated to be submitted to CalRecycle in To provide an annual update on the County Integrated Waste Management Plan, the County Department of Public Works prepares the County Integrated Waste Management Plan Annual Reports. The Annual Reports provide an assessment of the Summary Plan and the Siting Element. In particular, as discussed in more detail below, the Annual Reports analyze solid waste disposal and estimated future remaining capacity at County landfills. The 2012 County Integrated Waste Management Plan Annual Report dated August 2013 is the most recent report available. (3) Local (a) Source Reduction and Recycling Element In 1992, the adopted the "Source Reduction and Recycling Element" to comply with AB 939. As discussed above, AB 939 requires that jurisdictions maintain a 50 percent or better diversion rate for solid waste. Based on the CalRecycle s 9 County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Plan 2012 Annual Report, August Page IV.L.3-5

6 profile for Pasadena, 5.6 pounds of waste were disposed per resident per day in 2012 (the most recent year for which data are available). 10 (b) Pasadena Municipal Code The Pasadena Municipal Code (PMC) includes provisions related to solid waste collection and diversion. Sections through of the PMC include the current revisions related to the 2013 CALGreen Code. In addition, Chapter 8.61 of the PMC implements the requirements of AB 939 and establishes the City s Solid Waste Collection Franchise System. In accordance with Section of the PMC, each franchisee is responsible for meeting a minimum recycling diversion rate of 75 percent on both a monthly basis and annual basis for construction and demolition debris as well as a minimum recycling diversion rate of 60 percent on both a monthly basis and annual basis for other solid waste. Furthermore, Chapter 8.62 of the PMC, the Construction and Demolition Waste Management Ordinance, requires an applicant for every covered project to divert a minimum of 75 percent of the construction and demolition debris resulting from that project in compliance with state and local statutory goals and policies and to create a mechanism to secure compliance with the stated diversion requirement. Covered projects include residential additions, tenant improvements of 1,000 square feet or more, new structures of 120 square feet or more, residential alterations and remodels, demolitions, and all City public works and City public construction projects awarded pursuant to the competitive bidding procedure according to Section of the PMC. Finally, Section of the PMC includes provisions for refuse storage facilities and recycling areas. b. Existing Conditions (a) Solid Waste Collection and Disposal The City s Integrated Waste Management Division is responsible for solid waste collection and disposal from all residential properties within the City. For non-residential uses, the Integrated Waste Management Division oversees private haulers that are part of an extensive non-exclusive franchise system. 11 Waste disposal sites, or landfills, are operated by both the City and the County, as well as by private companies. In addition, transfer stations are utilized to temporarily store debris until larger hauling trucks are available to transport the materials directly to the CalRecycle, On-Line Disposal Rate Calculator, Selection for Pasadena and 2012, /lgcentral/reports/onlinedisposalratecalc.aspx, accessed April 30, 2014., Department of Public Works, Franchise List, Effective July 1, 2012, cityofpasadena.net/publicworks/trash_and_recycling/, accessed April 30, Page IV.L.3-6

7 landfills. Landfill availability is limited by several factors, including: (1) restrictions to accepting waste generated only within a landfill s particular jurisdiction and/or wasteshed boundary; (2) tonnage permit limitations; (3) types of waste; and (4) operational constraints. Landfills within the County are categorized as either Class III or unclassified landfills. Non-hazardous municipal solid waste is disposed of in Class III landfills, while construction waste, yard trimmings, and earth-like waste are disposed of in unclassified (inert) landfills. Eleven Class III landfills and one unclassified landfill with solid waste facility permits are located within the County. 12 (b) Landfills As shown in Table IV.L.3-1 on page IV.L.3-8, based on the information provided in the 2012 County Integrated Waste Management Plan Annual Report, the remaining disposal capacity for the County s Class III landfills is estimated at approximately million tons. 13 Solid waste generated in the City is currently disposed of primarily at the Scholl Canyon landfill, which is permitted until 2025 and has a remaining disposal capacity of 3.41 million tons. In 2012, approximately million tons of solid waste were disposed of at County Class III landfills. In addition, approximately million tons of solid waste were disposed of at County transformation facilities in Approximately 99 percent of this solid waste disposal was generated from within the County, with the remaining waste generated from outside of the County. The County s unclassified landfill generally does not face capacity issues. As shown in Table IV.L.3-1, the remaining disposal capacity for the unclassified landfill is estimated at approximately million tons. In 2012, approximately million tons of inert waste (e.g., soil, concrete, asphalt, and other construction and demolition debris) were disposed of at the County s unclassified landfill. Given the remaining permitted capacity and at the average disposal rate of 286 tons per day in 2012, this capacity would be exhausted in 614 years. Thus, the unclassified landfill serving the County has adequate long-term capacity County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Plan 2012 Annual Report, August Remaining disposal capacity set forth in the 2012 County Integrated Waste Management Plan was based on a survey conducted by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works and review of criteria established by various agencies. Page IV.L.3-7

8 Table IV.L.3-1 Solid Waste Disposal and Estimated Remaining Capacity for Los Angeles County Landfills Class III Landfill Location 2012 Total Disposal (million tons) a Estimated Remaining Permitted Capacity as of 12/31/12 (million tons) a Antelope Valley b Palmdale Burbank c Burbank Calabasas d Unincorporated Chiquita Canyon e Unincorporated Lancaster f Lancaster Pebbly Beach g Unincorporated Puente Hill h Unincorporated San Clemente i Unincorporated Scholl Canyon j Glendale Sunshine Canyon City/County k Unincorporated Whittier l Whittier Class III Total Overall Unclassified Azusa Land Reclamation Azusa Unclassified Total Overall a b c d e f g h i j Includes in-county and out-of-county solid waste disposal at landfill. Capacities are listed as of December 31, Proposed expansion approved in 2011, which increased capacity by approximately 9 million tons. Limited to the City of Burbank use only. Limited to Calabasas Wasteshed, as defined by Los Angeles County Ordinance No , which is composed of the incorporated cities of Hidden Hills, Agoura Hills, Westlake Village and Thousand Oaks; that portion of the City of Los Angeles bordered by the northerly line of Township 2 North on the north, Interstate Highway 405 on the east, Sunset Boulevard and the Pacific Ocean on the south, and the City boundary on the west; and certain unincorporated areas in the Counties of Los Angeles and Ventura. Proposed expansion pending, which would increase capacity by approximately 32 million tons. Land Use Permit (LUP) limits waste disposal to 30,000 tons per week. New CUP became effective December 14, 2011 which allows usage of the remaining design capacity of 12.3 million tons. Due to its location on Santa Catalina Island, only the City of Avalon and adjacent unincorporated County areas have access to this facility. Does not accept waste generated from the City of Los Angeles outside the County Sanitation District boundary and Orange County. Closure occurred on October 31, Owned and operated by U.S. Navy (does not accept City of Los Angeles waste). Limited to Scholl Canyon Wasteshed as defined by City of Glendale Ordinance No Page IV.L.3-8

9 Table IV.L.3-1 (Continued) Solid Waste Disposal and Estimated Remaining Capacity for Los Angeles County Landfills Estimated Remaining Permitted Landfill Location 2012 Total Disposal (million tons) a Capacity as of 12/31/12 (million tons) a k The combined Sunshine Canyon City/County Landfill became effective December 31, 2008, based on a memorandum of understanding between the City and County of Los Angeles. l Limited to City of Whittier use only. Source: Matrix Environmental, 2014, based on information from the Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Plan 2012 Annual Report. (c) Recycling Facilities Waste generated in the City may also be diverted from landfills and recycled. The City s Department of Public Works coordinates the recycling program in the City. After recycling is picked up, the materials are taken to the Allan Company in Baldwin Park where they are sorted by type. 14 The sorting is done both by hand and mechanically before being sold to brokers who then sell it to others for the remanufacture of new products. In order to provide more information regarding construction waste diversion, the Department of Public Works publishes the Guide to Pasadena s Construction & Demolition Ordinance, which provides information about the C&D Waste Management Plan application approval and includes a list of facilities that process mixed construction and demolition debris as well as having a 2014 certified recycling rate of 75 percent or greater. 15 While the final choice in recycling facilities rests with the Project Applicant, the nearest facility in the vicinity of the Project Site that could be utilized is American Reclamation located at 4560 Doran Street in the City of Los Angeles. (d) Household Hazardous Waste Hazardous materials are not only found in businesses and factories, but are also used every day at home. Many cleaners, pesticides, home maintenance, pool care, and other products are the same materials, and just as hazardous, as the highly regulated hazardous materials used by businesses. Household hazardous wastes may not be 14 15, Recycling Survey FAQ, accessed April 30, 2014., Department of Public Works, Guide to Pasadena s Construction & Demolition Ordinance, accessed April 30, Page IV.L.3-9

10 thrown in the trash and must be disposed of at special facilities. Household hazardous wastes can be taken to what are called a Household Hazardous Waste Roundup where professionals collect, consolidate, recycle and properly dispose of household hazardous wastes. The County of Los Angeles operates free Household Hazardous Waste Roundups at different locations in the County on a scheduled basis. In addition, the City of Los Angeles operates free permanent collection sites which are operated by the City of Los Angeles but are available to all County residents, as well. The City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation s Los Angeles Glendale S.A.F.E. (solvents/automotive/flammables/electronics) Center, which is one of the six permanent waste collection sites established by City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation throughout the area, accepts household hazardous waste and universal waste generated by residents of the. These S.A.F.E. centers are open every weekend to allow residents and businesses to conveniently dispose of their household hazardous waste. These S.A.F.E. centers generally accept paint and solvents, used motor oil and filters, antifreeze, other automotive fluids, cleaning products, pool and garden chemicals, aerosol cans, all medicine, auto batteries, household (alkaline) batteries, fluorescent tubes and bulbs, thermostats, other mercury-containing lamps, and various electronics. 16 In addition, CalRecycle has certified used motor oil collection centers throughout the State. These locations accept uncontaminated oil throughout the year. For further discussion of the use, storage, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes on the Project Site, refer to Section IV.J, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this Draft EIR. (e) Construction and Demolition Debris The United States Environmental Protection Agency report, Characterization of Building-Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the United States, characterizes the quantity and composition of building-related construction and demolition debris generated in the United States, and summarizes the waste management practices for this waste stream. 17 The report also includes building-related construction and demolition debris generation rate estimates based on empirical data for new construction sites gathered by the National Association of Homebuilders Research Center; the Metropolitan Service District in Portland, Oregon; Woodbin 2, a non-profit organization in Wake County, North Carolina; McHenry County, Illinois; and Cornell University City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, Bureau of Sanitation, Los Angeles-Glendale S.A.F.E. Collection Center, accessed April 30, USEPA Report No EPA , Characterization of Building Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the United States, June 1998, accessed April 30, Page IV.L.3-10

11 The California State definition of construction and demolition debris includes concrete, asphalt paving and roofing, lumber, gypsum board, rock, soil, fines, and many miscellaneous and composite materials generated by demolition and new construction of structures that contain materials that cannot be put in any other type or subtype. 18 There is typically much less concrete in construction debris than demolition debris, although some construction projects produce considerable quantities of concrete, depending on the technology used to build the concrete walls. During demolition activities, large quantities of waste can be produced in a short period of time, depending on the demolition technique used. The duration of demolition activities also varies, depending on the technique used (i.e., implosion with explosives, use of crane and wrecking ball, or deconstruction of structures). Generally, demolition projects use a combination of the last two basic techniques depending on the materials used in the structure, the physical size of the structure, the surrounding buildings that cannot be disturbed or impacted, and the time allocated for the work. One hundred percent of the weight of a building, including the concrete foundations, driveways, patios, etc., may be generated as construction and demolition debris when a building is demolished. On a per building basis, demolition waste quantities may be 20 to 30 times as much as construction debris. 19 (f) Solid Waste Generation As previously discussed, AB 939 s 50 percent diversion requirement is now measured in terms of per capita disposal expressed as pounds per person per day. A total of approximately 153,516.4 tons of solid waste was disposed of by land uses within the City during 2012 (the most recent year for which data are available). 20 For the residential population within the City, the 50-percent per capita disposal target rate is 10.9 pounds per person per day, and the measured annual disposal rate was 5.6 pounds per person per day in ,22 For employees, the 50 percent per capita disposal target rate is California Integrated Waste Management Board, Publications, CIWMB Publications Catalog, Statewide Waste Characterization Study 2004, 5C pdf, accessed April 30, Op. cit. CalRecycle website, Jurisdiction Diversion/Disposal Rate Detail for Pasadena, Reporting Year: 2012, =367&Year=2012, accessed May 1, Ibid. The 50 percent per capita disposal target is the amount of disposal that is approximately equivalent to the current 50 percent diversion requirement. To meet the 50 percent goal, jurisdictions must dispose of not more than their 50 percent per capita disposal target. For most jurisdictions, the 50 percent per capita disposal target is based on the average of 50 percent of total waste generation from 2003 through 2006 expressed in terms of per capita disposal. Source: CalRecycle website, LGCentral/Basics/PerCapitaDsp.htm#UsingPerCapita, accessed May 1, Page IV.L.3-11

12 pounds per person per day, and the actual annual disposal rate was 8.4 pounds per person per day in As previously discussed, for the most recent Jurisdiction Review period of , the City achieved the 50 percent equivalent per capita disposal requirement Environmental Impacts a. Methodology The analysis of Project impacts on solid waste is based on a calculation of the Project s solid waste generation during Project construction and operation. Construction waste generation is based on the United States Environmental Protection Agency s Characterization of Building-Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the United States (June 1998). As the City has not published operational solid waste generation rates for individual land uses, factors obtained from the Targeted Statewide Waste Characterization Study: Waste Disposal and Diversion Findings for Selected Industry Groups (June 2006) and the City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation, City Waste Characterization and Quantification Study (July 2002) were used in this analysis. The Project s resulting solid waste generation was then analyzed relative to existing landfill capacities and solid waste generation to determine if the existing landfills would be able to accommodate the solid waste generated by the Project. b. Thresholds of Significance The Project may have a significant impact related to solid waste if: The Scholl Canyon landfill would not have adequate permitted capacity to serve the Project, or The Project would not comply with applicable statues and regulations related to solid waste CalRecycle website, Jurisdiction Diversion/Disposal Rate Detail for Pasadena, Reporting Year: 2012, =367&Year=2012, accessed May 1, Note that the City s Annual Report has not been formally presented to, or approved by CalRecycle. Thus, the City s compliance status has not yet been finalized. CalRecycle, Countywide, Regionwide, and Statewide Jurisdiction/Disposal Progress Report, Selection for Los Angeles County, Report Year 2011, accessed May 1, Page IV.L.3-12

13 As evaluated in the Initial Study included as Appendix A-2 of this Draft EIR, Project development would occur in compliance with the aforementioned regulations including the City s Source Reduction and Recycling Element, the applicable chapters of the PMC, the Public Works Department s Solid Waste Division s program regarding recycling, and the submittal of a Construction Waste Management Plan in accordance with the City s Construction and Demolition Ordinance. Therefore, as concluded in the Initial Study (see Appendix A-2 of this Draft EIR), a less than significant impact with regard to compliance with applicable solid waste plans and policies would occur and further analysis of this issue in this Draft EIR is not required. c. Regulatory Compliance Measures and Project Design Features (1) Regulatory Compliance Measures The Project would comply with all applicable regulatory standards. Implementation of the following Regulatory Compliance Measures, as currently required and/or as may be amended in the future, is intended to reduce impacts related to solid waste facilities: Regulatory Compliance Measure L.3-1: The Project Applicant is required to submit a Construction Waste Management Plan that would achieve a diversion of a minimum of 75 percent of the construction and demolition debris generated during Project construction in accordance with the City s Construction and Demolition Ordinance (Chapter 8.62 of the PMC). Regulatory Compliance Measure L.3-2: The Project is required to comply with the applicable franchisee s recycling system in accordance with the requirements of Section of the PMC. Regulatory Compliance Measure L.3-3: The Project must provide adequate refuse storage facilities and recycling areas in accordance with the requirements of Section of the PMC. Regulatory Compliance Measure L.3-4: The Proposed Project is required to comply with all applicable provisions pertaining to solid waste disposal as set forth in Sections through of the PMC. (2) Project Design Features No project design features are proposed with regard to solid waste facilities. Page IV.L.3-13

14 d. Project Impacts (1) Construction Construction of the proposed Project would result in a temporary increase in the generation of solid waste. Approximately 356,030 cubic feet of existing surface parking lots would be demolished under the Project. Assuming asphalt weighs 145 pounds per cubic foot, demolition activities associated with the Project would generate approximately 51,624,408 pounds (or 25,812 tons) of waste. 25 Construction activities generate a variety of scraps and wastes, with the majority of recyclables being wood waste, drywall, metal, paper, and cardboard. Solid waste generated during Project construction was estimated based on the square footage of the proposed residential and nonresidential uses using construction-generation rates provided in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency s Characterization of Building-Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the United States (June 1998). Based on a construction-generation rate of 4.38 pounds of waste for every square foot of new residential construction and 3.89 pounds of waste for every square foot of new nonresidential construction, construction of the Project is estimated to generate approximately 4,907,880 pounds (or 2,454 tons) of solid waste over the construction period. Thus, the Project s total demolition and construction solid waste would be 28,266 tons. The Project Applicant must submit a Construction Waste Management Plan in accordance with Regulatory Compliance Measure L.3-1, which would require the diversion of a minimum of 75 percent of the construction and demolition debris generated during Project construction. Solid waste recycling and diversion efforts would be implemented to divert solid waste materials from local landfills including providing temporary waste separation bins on-site during construction. Solid waste would be transported off-site and taken to material recovery yards, where materials would be sorted, salvaged and/or recycled. Assuming a minimum 75 percent reduction is achieved by these efforts, the amount of solid waste generated by the Project that would be disposed of in area landfills would be approximately 7,066 tons. As discussed in Section III, Project Description, of this Draft EIR, the Project would be developed in two phases. Specifically, buildout of Phase 1, Development Areas A and B, is planned for 2016 and buildout of Phase 2, Development Area C, is planned for Construction for each development phase is anticipated to be completed within an approximate 24-month timeframe. The entire 7,066 tons of construction-related solid waste to be taken to area landfills would thus be divided by four years (i.e., two years for each development phase) or 1,766.5 tons per year. The daily construction waste that would end 25 National Asphalt Pavement Association, How to Determine Quantities, index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=144&itemid=330, accessed April 30, Page IV.L.3-14

15 up in any particular landfill would vary depending on daily and weekly demolition and construction schedules. The estimated remaining permitted capacity at the Azusa Land Reclamation facility is million tons. Given the remaining permitted capacity and at the average disposal rate of 286 tons per day in 2012 according to the 2012 County Integrated Waste Management Plan Annual Report, this capacity would be exhausted in 614 years. Thus, the unclassified landfill serving the County has adequate long-term capacity. Based on the analysis provided above, Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction activities would result in a limited and temporary generation of solid waste and are not anticipated to have any adverse impact on landfill capacity. Therefore, Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction impacts with regard to the estimated remaining capacity of the Azusa Land Reclamation facility would be less than significant. (2) Operation Operation of the Project would result in the ongoing generation of solid waste. Over the long term, the Project would be expected to generate approximately 1,908.5 tons of solid waste per year (5.2 tons per day) as shown in Table IV.L.3-2 on page IV.L However, it is important to note that this estimate is conservative, in that the amount of the Project s solid waste that would need to be landfilled would likely be less than this forecast based on successful City implementation of AB 939. Nonetheless, as AB 939 does not contain requirements for individual development projects, it was conservatively assumed that all operational solid waste generated by the Project would need to be landfilled. As analyzed in the worst-case scenario below, it is assumed all 5.2 tons per day would be disposed of at a landfill. The approximately 1,908.5 tons of solid waste that would be generated by the Project per year would represent a 1.2-percent increase in the City s annual solid waste disposal quantity based on the City s 2012 disposal rate of approximately 153,516.4 tons. Project-generated solid waste would be collected by a private solid waste hauler. As previously discussed, solid waste generated in the City is currently disposed of primarily at the Scholl Canyon landfill and it is anticipated that the solid waste generated during Project operation would be disposed of at the Scholl Canyon landfill. As shown in Table IV.L.3-2, the estimated remaining capacity for Scholl Canyon landfill is approximately 3.41 million tons as of December 31, Thus, the 1,908.5 tons of solid waste per year that would 26 From the Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Plan 2012 Annual Report, August Estimated remaining Permitted Capacity based on landfill owner/operator responses in a written survey (Footnote continued on next page) Page IV.L.3-15

16 Table IV.L.3-2 Estimated Project Solid Waste Generation Phase 1 Type Size Emp./sf Number Total of Emp. Solid Waste Generation a (tons/year) Office 210,000 sf N/A N/A 1,998 lbs/1,000 sf Restaurant 10,000 sf 1/ ,437 lbs/emp b 80.5 Residential 475 units N/A N/A 4,463.9 lbs/household/yr c 1,060.2 Subtotal 1,350.5 Phase 2 d Office 380,000 sf N/A N/A 1,998 lbs/1,000 sf Retail 15,000 sf 1/ ,714 lbs/emp e 69.6 Restaurant 15,000 sf 1/ ,528 lbs/emp f Project Total 1,908.5 emp = employees sf = square feet yr = year a Unless otherwise specified, generation rates based on June 2006 Targeted Statewide Waste Characterization Study: Waste Disposal and Diversion Findings for Selected Industry Groups prepared for California Integrated Waste Management Board. b Restaurant solid waste generation factor is for a full-service restaurant. c Residential solid waste generation factor based on lbs per household per day as set forth in City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide. d The analysis of Phase 2 development is conservative, as it assumes the development of the ancillary retail uses, which would have a higher solid waste generation than if all office was assumed. This approach is consistent with the assumptions used in this Draft EIR, including in Section IV.B.2, Parking. As shown, the ancillary retail is divided into 15,000 sf of retail uses and 15,000 sf of restaurant uses. e Retail solid waste generation factor is for retail classified as retail, other stores. f Restaurant solid waste generation factor is for a fast-food restaurant. Source: Matrix Environmental, be generated by the Project would represent approximately 0.06 percent of the estimated remaining capacity available with Scholl Canyon landfill as of In addition, the average daily disposal at Scholl Canyon landfill was 675 tons of solid waste per day as of by Los Angeles County Department of Public Works as well as a review of the site specific permit criteria established by local land use agencies, Local Enforcement Agencies, California Regional Water Control Board, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Page IV.L.3-16

17 Thus, the 5.2 tons of solid waste per day that would be generated by the Project would represent 0.8 percent of the 2012 average daily intake for Scholl Canyon landfill. In addition, the Project would comply with several PMC requirements, including Section of the PMC regarding the franchisee s recycling system, Section of the PMC regarding adequate refuse storage facilities and recycling areas, and the CALGreen Code as revised and codified in the PMC. Furthermore, if required, the Project Applicant would submit a program to the Public Works Department s Solid Waste Division containing provisions regarding the recycling of office paper, corrugated cardboard, mixed glass, and green waste. According to the County of Los Angeles Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan 2012 Annual Report (2012 Annual Report), there are approximately 16 years of remaining life for the Scholl Canyon landfill. However, an expansion of the Scholl Canyon landfill is currently proposed, as discussed in the 2012 Annual Report. The currently proposed expansion consists of two variations: Variation 1 (vertical expansion only) and Variation 2 (vertical and horizontal expansion). Variation 1 would provide approximately 11.5 million cubic yards of additional capacity and would extend the life of the Scholl Canyon landfill by 13 years (assuming a continued baseline disposal rate of 1,400 tons per day) and Variation 2 would provide approximately 16.5 million cubic yards of additional capacity and would extend the life of the landfill by 19 years. 28 In addition, the 2012 Annual Report anticipates that future disposal needs can be adequately met through 2027 (i.e., beyond Project buildout) via a multi-pronged approach that includes successfully permitting and developing proposed in-county landfill expansions, utilizing available or planned out-of-county disposal capacity, developing necessary infrastructure to facilitate exportation of waste to out-of-county landfills, and developing conversion and other alternative technologies. While in the past solid waste disposal has occurred largely or solely within landfills located in the County, the trend in recent years has been an increase in solid waste disposal at landfills located outside of the County. Thus, the proper current context within which to view the Project s potential solid waste disposal needs include landfills located within, as well as outside of, the County. Specifically, one waste-by-rail landfill is anticipated to be available for use by the County: the Mesquite Regional Landfill in Imperial County located along the Union Pacific Railroad County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Plan 2012 Annual Report, August Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, Scholl Canyon Landfill, Draft Environmental Impact Report, Notice of Availability, accessed May 28, Page IV.L.3-17

18 The County will continue to address landfill capacity through the preparation of the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan Annual Reports. The preparation of each report provides sufficient lead time (15 years) to address potential future shortfalls in landfill capacity. Furthermore, in future years, it is anticipated that the rate of declining landfill capacity will slow considering the s "Source Reduction and Recycling Element. In addition, Governor Brown signed Assembly Bill 341 establishing a state policy goal that no less than 75 percent of solid waste generated be source reduced, recycled, or composted by Based on the analysis above, the estimated solid waste generation for the Project would not exceed the available capacity of Scholl Canyon landfill. Thus, Scholl Canyon landfill would have adequate permitted capacity to serve the Project. Therefore, Phase 1 and Phase 2 development as well as conditions at Project buildout would result in less than significant impacts on solid waste. 4. Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts occur when impacts that are significant or less than significant from a proposed project combine with similar impacts from other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects in a similar geographic area. Based on the information presented in Section II, Environmental Setting, of this Draft EIR, there are 55 related projects located within the. These projects would generate construction and demolition waste and, thus, would cumulatively increase the need for waste disposal at the County s unclassified landfill. These projects are estimated to result in an increase of approximately 2,300 residential units; approximately 500,000 square feet of various types of office, retail, restaurant, and medical facilities; and approximately 1,200 hotel rooms. Like the Project, if a related project is subject to the provisions of the PMC, it would be required to submit a Construction Waste Management Plan requiring the diversion of a minimum of 75 percent of the construction and demolition debris generated during construction in accordance with the City s Construction and Demolition Ordinance. Furthermore, as previously discussed, the County s unclassified landfill generally does not face capacity shortages and is expected to have sufficient capacity to accommodate cumulative demand for the foreseeable future. Therefore, cumulative construction impacts with respect to landfill capacity would be less than significant. A review of the Project s related projects list indicates considerable growth is proposed in the future within the. This growth is anticipated to increase the demand for landfill capacity. As shown in Table IV.L.3-2 on page IV.L.3-16, the Project would be expected to generate approximately 1,908.5 tons of solid waste per year (5.2 tons per day), which would increase the amount of operational solid waste generated by cumulative development that would be disposed of primarily at Scholl Canyon landfill. As Page IV.L.3-18

19 shown in Table IV.L.3-2 on page IV.L.3-16, the estimated remaining capacity for Scholl Canyon landfill is approximately 3.41 million tons as of December 31, The total cumulative operational solid waste (Project plus related projects) is anticipated to only represent a small fraction of the remaining daily permitted intake at the Scholl Canyon landfill. According to the 2012 Annual Report, there are approximately 16 years of remaining life for the Scholl Canyon landfill. However, an expansion of the Scholl Canyon landfill is currently proposed, as discussed above. The currently proposed expansion would extend the life of the landfill between 13 and 19 years depending on which of two options is implemented. In addition, as previously discussed, it is anticipated that future disposal needs can be adequately met through 2027 via a multi-pronged approach, and the County will continue to address future landfill capacity through the preparation of the Annual Reports based on 15-year planning horizons. Additionally, implementation of Assembly Bill 341 will require the diversion of 75 percent of solid waste, thus serving to further reduce actual disposal rates. Therefore, operational impacts with respect to landfill capacity would be less than significant on a cumulative basis. 5. Mitigation Measures As Project impacts during construction and operations are less than significant, no mitigation measures are required with regard to solid waste. 6. Level of Significance After Mitigation With compliance with the identified regulatory compliance measures, Project-level and cumulative impacts to solid waste during both Phase 1 and Phase 2 development as well as at Project buildout would be less than significant. In addition, cumulative impacts to solid waste at Project buildout would be less than significant. 29 From the Los Angeles County Integrated Waste Management Plan 2012 Annual Report, August Estimated remaining Permitted Capacity based on landfill owner/operator responses in a written survey by Los Angeles County Department of Public Works as well as a review of the site specific permit criteria established by local land use agencies, Local Enforcement Agencies, California Regional Water Control Board, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Page IV.L.3-19