Appendix A Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study

Appendices

Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Draft Supplemental EIR City of Anaheim

Appendix A Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study

Appendices

July 2013

This page intentionally left blank.

Initial Study for the

CITY OF ANAHEIM HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES SITES

REZONING PROJECT

City of Anaheim, California

DEV2012-00118 EIR2012-00346

Lead Agency:

City of Anaheim

200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, California 92805

Prepared by:

The Planning Center|DC&E 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 Santa Ana, California 92707

(714) 966-9220

October 2012

City of Anaheim

City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Initial Study i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................... 1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 Project Background ........................................................................................................... 2 City of Anaheim Environmental/Project Information Form ................................................ 3

CITY OF ANAHEIM ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ................................................... 23

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .................................................................... 23 Determination .................................................................................................................. 23 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .............................................................................. 27 I. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................. 27 II. Agricultural Resources .......................................................................................... 27 III. Air Quality ............................................................................................................. 28 IV. Biological Resources ............................................................................................ 29 V. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................... 30 VI. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................. 31 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................. 32 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ........................................................................ 32 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................ 33 X. Land Use and Planning ......................................................................................... 35 XI. Mineral Resources ................................................................................................ 35 XII. Noise ..................................................................................................................... 36 XIII. Population and Housing ........................................................................................ 37 XIV. Public Services ..................................................................................................... 37 XV. Recreation ............................................................................................................. 38 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ............................................................................................ 39 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems ................................................................................ 40 XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance ...................................................................... 41

FISH AND GAME DETERMINATION ........................................................................................ 43 REFERENCES CITED ................................................................................................................ 44

City of Anaheim

City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Initial Study ii

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Regional Location ............................................................................................................. 5

LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Parcels to Apply Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone ............................................................... 7 2 Parcels to Apply Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone ........................................... 7 3 General Plan Amendments Approved after the General Plan Update (May 25, 2004) ... 15

APPENDICES Appendix A Residential Opportunity and Mixed Use Overlay Zone Parcels

City of Anaheim

City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Initial Study 1

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Introduction

The City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project is proposed to provide the following:

Implementation of the Housing Element’s Housing Production Strategy 1V to rezone properties identified as Housing Opportunities Sites in the 2006-2014 General Plan Housing Element, in order to facilitate “by right” housing development at these locations.

Facilitation of future use of the Statutory Infill Housing Exemption and SB 226 streamlining allowed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by providing updated community level environmental review.

An update of General Plan Land Use Element Tables LU-5: Residential Build-Out Estimates and LU-6: Non-Residential Build-Out Estimates to reflect all General Plan Amendments that have been adopted since the City’s General Plan was adopted in May 2004.

These proposed actions are described in greater detail on the Environmental/Project Information Form.

The City of Anaheim, as lead agency for the project, is responsible for preparing environmental documentation in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as amended, to determine if approval of the discretionary actions requested and subsequent development could have a significant impact on the environment. As defined by Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, an initial study is prepared primarily to provide the lead agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an environmental impact report (EIR), negative declaration, or mitigated negative declaration would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for the proposed project. Since the proposed zone changes are consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan, the City has determined that a supplement to the certified 2004 General Plan and Zoning Code Update EIR would be the appropriate environmental review for the proposed project, consistent with Section 15162 and 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Together with the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the Environmental Checklist Form, this Initial Study has been distributed to all responsible agencies as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A notice has also been sent to responsible agencies and interested parties indicating that these documents are available for a 30-day public review at the Planning Department within Anaheim City Hall at 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard in the City of Anaheim or on the Planning Department’s website (www.anaheim.net/planning, click on the link to “Planning and Zoning” followed by the link to “Current Environmental Documents”).

City of Anaheim


Project Background On May 25, 2004, the Anaheim City Council certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 330 as the environmental documentation for a comprehensive General Plan and Zoning Code Update. As part of these actions, General Plan Amendment No. 2004-00419 was adopted for the General Plan Update and Ordinance No. 5920 was introduced to amend the Zoning Code in its entirety. Since this update, thirty-nine General Plan Amendments have been approved and four General Plan Amendments are pending.

On June 8, 2004, the Anaheim City Council subsequently adopted Ordinance No. 5920 for the Zoning Code update. As part of amending the Zoning Code in its entirety, this ordinance added Chapter 18.32 Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone to the Anaheim Municipal Code.

In September 2006, the state legislature adopted AB 32, establishing a goal of achieving 1990 greenhouse gas (GHG) emission levels for the state by 2020. In August 2007, the state legislature adopted SB 97, which requires that CEQA address impacts related to GHG emissions. Since EIR No. 330 was certified in May 2004, potential impacts related to GHG were not addressed in that document.

On August 11, 2009, the Anaheim City Council approved the 2006-2014 General Plan Housing Element (General Plan Amendment No. 2008-00467). A mitigated negative declaration was prepared as the environmental documentation for this project. The Housing Element documents the City’s capacity to meet its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) goals, as required by State law. To meet this requirement, the Housing Element includes Housing Production Strategy 1V: Rezoning of Housing Opportunities Sites.

On October 11, 2011 the Anaheim City Council adopted Ordinance No. 6224, adding Chapter 18.34 Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone to the Anaheim Municipal Code. The City Council determined that this action was exempt from CEQA under Section 21080 of the Public Resources Code.

In March 2012, the current version of the Anaheim Traffic Analysis Model (ATAM) was approved by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) for use as a local traffic model. ATAM is required to be updated every eight years to stay consistent with regional socioeconomic databases. With the previous version expiring September, 2010, the current version of ATAM reflects the most recent regional socioeconomic database. The previous version was used for the analysis in EIR No. 330.

City of Anaheim


CITY OF ANAHEIM ENVIRONMENTAL/PROJECT INFORMATION FORM

1. Project title: City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project

2. Lead agency name and address: City of Anaheim, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805

3. Contact person and phone number: Susan Kim, 714-765-4958 4. Project Location: 160 parcels located within the City of Anaheim, CA, as described in

Tables 1 and 2 and shown in Appendix A. 5. Project sponsor’s name and address: City of Anaheim Planning Department, 200 S.

Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805

6. General plan designation and zoning: See Tables 1 and 2

7. Description of the project: The Proposed Project is comprised of three elements:

1. The City of Anaheim (“City”) proposes to add one of two possible overlay zones to certain properties identified as Opportunities Sites in the 2006-2014 General Plan Housing Element (“Housing Element”). The overlay zone added to the subject properties would be consistent with the properties’ General Plan designation. The subject properties and the proposed Mixed Use and Residential Opportunity Overlay Zones are identified in Tables 1 and 2 and Appendix A. The addition of the overlay zones to the subject properties would implement the Housing Element’s Housing Production Strategy 1V: Rezoning of Housing Opportunities Sites. Properties identified with an “a” (i.e., 12a) are sites that were not identified in the Housing Element but are adjacent to an Opportunity Site and are proposed for rezoning.

2. The City proposes to facilitate the opportunity for projects to utilize Public Resources Code Section 21159.24, which allows urban infill residential development that meets certain criteria to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City would facilitate the Statutory Infill Housing Exemption by providing updated community level environmental review, as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21159.20, for properties designated for residential development by the General Plan In addition, the City may utilize the SB 226 CEQA streamlining provisions that go into effect January 1, 2013.

3. The City proposes to update General Plan Land Use Element Tables LU-5: Residential Buildout Estimates and LU-6: Non-Residential Build-Out Estimates to reflect all General Plan Amendments that have been adopted since the City’s General Plan was adopted in May 2004, as shown on Table 3.

The Proposed Project would not change any of the existing land use designations in the Anaheim General Plan.

City of Anaheim


8. Surrounding land uses and setting: Located in northeastern Orange County, the City of Anaheim and its Sphere-of-Influence lie approximately 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles north of Santa Ana, as shown on Figure 1. The City is surrounded by the Cities of Fullerton, Placentia, and Yorba Linda to the north; Riverside County to the east; the Cities of Orange, Garden Grove, Stanton, and unincorporated Orange County to the south; and, the Cities of Cypress and Buena Park to the west. The City encompasses over 32,000 acres of land, stretching nearly 20 miles along the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway, and includes another 2,431 acres of unincorporated land within its Sphere-of-Influence. In addition to SR-91, regional access to and from Anaheim is provided by the Santa Ana (I-5), Orange (SR-57) and Costa Mesa (SR-55) Freeways; the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241); and Amtrak and Metrolink passenger train services at Angel Stadium and Anaheim Canyon Stations.

9. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): No approvals from other agencies are anticipated to be necessary to implement the proposed project.

I hereby certify that the statements and information furnished above and in the attached exhibits, photos, etc., are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Name of Preparer: The Planning Center|DC&E Relationship: Consultant Address: 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100, Santa Ana, CA 92707 Phone No.: (714) 966-9220

Preparer’s signature: Date: 10-11-12

City of Anaheim Housing Opportunities Sites Rezoning Project Initial Study

0

Scale (Miles)

4

City of Anaheim

La Habra

Cerritos

La Mirada

Fullerton

Brea

PlacentiaYorba Linda

5

AnaheimBuenaPark

5

Garden Grove

Stanton

Huntington Beach

Westminster

FountainValley

Santa Ana

IrvineTustin

VillaPark

Orange

405

22 55

261 241

57

CostaMesa

Chino Hills

La HabraHeights

Whittier

Cypress

Chino

Corona

73

DiamondBar

SNA

County of Riverside

County of San Bernardino

County of Orange

County of Los Angeles

County

of Oran

ge

County

of Los A

ngele

s

241

241

133

Anaheim

405

Figure 1 Regional Location

5

91

91

City of Anaheim Boundary

City of Anaheim


This page has been left intentionally blank.

City of Anaheim


Table 1

Parcels to Apply Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone

Opportunity Site # APN

Size (Acres)

Potential Residential

Units

Existing General Plan

Land Use Designation

Existing Zoning

Existing Use

33 03702123 0.6 36 Mixed-Use C-G , I Appliance Store

42 03702301 0.2 12 Mixed-Use C-G Mortuary 43 03702302 0.2 12 Mixed-Use C-G Mortuary 44 03702303 0.2 12 Mixed-Use C-G Mortuary 45 03702304 0.4 24 Mixed-Use C-G Mortuary

Table 2 Parcels to Apply Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone


Size (Acres)


Units



Existing Zoning

Existing Use

1 03517303 0.3 5 Low Medium I Contractor's Yard


3 03517306 0.2 3 Low Medium I Auto Parts Salvage




8 03517315 0.2 3 Low Medium I Vacant

9 03517602 0.2 3 Low Medium RS-3

Small Industrial Firms

10 03517606 0.2 3 Low Medium RS-3


11 03517610 1.3 23 Low Medium I


12 03517614 0.2 3 Low Medium I


12a 03517603 0.1 1 Low Medium I


13 03517615 0.2 3 Low Medium I


City of Anaheim




Size (Acres)


Units



Existing Zoning

Existing Use

14 03527022 1.1 19 Low Medium C-G Glass Shop

15 03527023 0.4 7 Low Medium C-G Yellow Cab Co



18 03527028 1.0 18 Low Medium C-G

9-unit Apartment Complex


23 03620309 0.1 3 Medium C-G

(SABC) Small Market

24 03620608 0.2 7 Medium T (SABC) Vacant

26 03620627 0.2 7 Medium C-G

(SABC) Vacant 28 03621015 0.6 10 Low Medium I (SABC) Vacant

30 03702114 0.1 3 Medium I (SABC)

Single Family Home

32 03702119 0.1 3 Medium I (SABC) Storage

34 03702201 0.6 21 Medium I (SABC)


35 03702202 0.3 10 Medium I (SABC) Auto Body Shop

36 03702203 0.3 10 Medium I (SABC) Auto Body Shop

40 03702212 1.1 39 Medium I (SABC)


52 03702411 1.0 18 Low Medium I (SABC) Contractor Yard

53 03708101 0.4 7 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Liquor Store

57 03709105 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC)

Single Family Home

61 03709109 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Small Shops

62 03709125 0.3 5 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Small Shops

63 03709127 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Contractor Yard

64 03711129 0.7 12 Low Medium I Contractor

City of Anaheim




Size (Acres)


Units



Existing Zoning

Existing Use

Yard

65 03711130 0.3 5 Low Medium I Contractor Yard

66 03711425 0.1 3 Medium I Industrial Firm






90 03713015 2.7 48 Low Medium I Industrial Firm


92 03713017 1.0 18 Low Medium I


93 03713021 1.8 32 Low Medium I


94 03713025 0.3 5 Low Medium I


95 03713026 0.4 7 Low Medium I


96 03713027 0.5 9 Low Medium I Service Station

97 03713028 0.8 14 Low Medium I


98 03713028 1.2 43 Medium I





102a 03716109 0.1 3 Medium I Industrial Firm

City of Anaheim




Size (Acres)


Units



Existing Zoning

Existing Use















117 03727222 0.4 7 Low Medium I Auto Repair/ Market

118 03727223 0.4 7 Low Medium I


119 03727225 0.5 18 Medium I


120 03727225 0.1 1 Low Medium I


121 03727226 0.6 21 Medium I


122 03727227 0.4 7 Low Medium I


City of Anaheim




Size (Acres)


Units



Existing Zoning

Existing Use

123 03727230 0.8 14 Low Medium I


125 07016106 0.5 9 Low Medium C-G Small Shops126 07016107 0.4 7 Low Medium C-G Restaurant 127 07016111 0.4 7 Low Medium C-G Small Shops128 07016112 0.4 7 Low Medium C-G Small Shops129 07016113 0.9 16 Low Medium C-G Thrift Store

130 07259125 1.3 23 Low Medium I


131 07259101 2.1 37 Low Medium I


132 07259126 1.3 23 Low Medium I


133 07259134 2.4 43 Low Medium I


135 07261101 14.1 253 Low Medium I Offices 136 08217049 0.6 22 Medium T (SABC) RV Park 137 08218501 0.1 3 Medium I (SABC) Offices 138 08218526 0.1 3 Medium T RV Park 139 08218527 0.1 3 Medium T RV Park 140 08218528 0.1 3 Medium T RV Park 141 08218529 0.1 3 Medium T RV Park 142 08218530 0.1 3 Medium T RV Park 143 08218531 0.1 3 Medium T RV Park

143a 08218535 0.1 3 Medium T RV Park 144 08218539 0.1 3 Medium T (SABC) RV Park 145 08218540 0.1 3 Medium T (SABC) RV Park 146 08218541 0.1 3 Medium T (SABC) RV Park 147 08218547 0.3 10 Medium T (SABC) Vacant 148 08218549 0.4 14 Medium T (SABC) RV Park 149 08218551 0.4 14 Medium T RV Park 150 08218552 0.2 7 Medium I (SABC) Vacant 151 08218553 1.2 43 Medium I (SABC) Vacant 152 08218558 4.2 151 Medium T (SABC) RV Park

154 08373116 0.8 28 Medium C-G Office Building

155 08373117 3.1 111 Medium C-G Office Building

City of Anaheim




Size (Acres)


Units



Existing Zoning

Existing Use

158 12602217 0.2 7 Medium T Nursery 159 12602218 1.1 39 Medium T Nursery 160 12603226 1.8 64 Medium C-G Motel 161 12631010 1.8 64 Medium T Nursery 162 12660204 1.8 32 Low Medium C-G Vacant

163 12723134 1.4 25 Low Medium C-G

(BCC)

Mixed retail/office uses

164 12723135 1.6 28 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Motel

165 12723156 0.6 10 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Parking Lot

166 12723159 0.6 10 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Bank

167 12723160 1.1 19 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Small Shops

168 12723161 0.3 5 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Parking Lot

169 12723162 0.6 10 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Small Shops

170 12724132 1.7 30 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Motel

171 12724167 1.3 23 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Motel

172 12724170 0.5 9 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Vacant 173 12807103 0.8 14 Low Medium T Restaurant 174 12807105 0.9 16 Low Medium T Motel 175 12807138 1.0 18 Low Medium T Motel 176 12807142 0.6 10 Low Medium C-G Restaurant 177 12834116 0.2 3 Low Medium O-L Offices

178 12834152 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(BCC) Restaurant

179 12834161 6.6 118 Low Medium I, O-L (BCC)

Small Industrial Firm

180 13532130 3.3 118 Medium C-G Motel

181 13533118 2.8 100 Medium C-G Self Storage Facility

184 23414102 0.3 5 Low Medium C-G

(SABC)

Single Family Home

185 23414109 0.3 5 Low Medium C-G

(SABC)


City of Anaheim




Size (Acres)


Units



Existing Zoning

Existing Use

186 23414110 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC)


187 25107123 0.4 7 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Small Shops

188 25107124 0.4 7 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Plumbing Contractors

189 25108102 0.7 12 Low Medium I (SABC) Gas Station

191 25108122 2.0 36 Low Medium I (SABC)


192 25108123 0.2 3 Low Medium I (SABC) Vacant

193 25108126 2.6 46 Low Medium I (SABC) Contractor Yard

197 25109213 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Vacant

198 25109214 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Vacant

199 25109215 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Small Shops

200 25109216 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Offices

201 25109217 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Offices

202 25109219 0.1 1 Low Medium C-G

(SABC)

Single Family Home

203 25109220 0.1 1 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Used Car Dealership

204 25110103 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G


205 25110104 0.3 5 Low Medium C-G


206 25110105 0.1 1 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Small Shops

207 25110106 0.1 1 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Small Shops

208 25110107 0.3 5 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Vacant

209 25110108 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Auto Repair

210 25110109 0.1 1 Low Medium C-G

(SABC) Small Shops

211 25110125 0.2 3 Low Medium C-G


217 34335160 2.6 46 Low-Medium T Nursery

City of Anaheim




Size (Acres)


Units



Existing Zoning

Existing Use

218 26833106 1.8 64 Medium T Plant Nursery

218a 26833102 0.8 28 Medium T Plant Nursery

219 13745122 1.0 36 Medium C-G


220 13745124 0.5 18 Medium C-G Vacant Building

221 13745125 0.6 21 Medium C-G


City of Anaheim


Table 3

General Plan Amendments Approved after the General Plan Update (May 25, 2004)

# General Plan Amendment

Case Number City

Council Resolution

Number Effective

Date

Did the Project Update Tables

LU5&6? Environmental Documentation Location Description

1 2004-00422 2005-019 3/15/05 Yes Previously-Certified EIR

330

Citywide Amended the Circulation and Noise Elements

2 2004-00421 2005-026 4/1/05 Yes Negative Declaration

1.2 acres on the southeast corner of Harbor Boulevard and Santa Ana Street (502 S. Harbor Blvd)

Amended land use designation: Low-Medium Density Residential to Low-Density Residential

3 2005-00423 2005-056 5/26/05 Yes Mitigated Negative

Declaration

1.2 acres adjacent to the south side of Broadway and 225 feet west of the centerline of Brookhurst Street

County Annexation (annexation was not approved) Amended land use designation: Corridor Residential to Medium Density Residential


Declaration

1.4 acres at the northeast corner of Gilbert Street and Ball Road

County Annexation (annexation was not approved) Amended land use designation: Low Density Residential to Corridor Residential


Declaration

0.6 acres at the southeast corner of Gilbert Street and Ball Road

County Annexation (annexation was not approved) Amended land use designation: Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential


Declaration

7 acres adjacent to the south side of Ball Road and 177 feet east of the centerline of Gilbert Street



Declaration

5.5 acres adjacent to the east side of Gilbert Street, 276 feet south of the centerline of Ball Road


City of Anaheim


Table 3 General Plan Amendments Approved after the General Plan Update (May 25, 2004)


Case Number City

Council Resolution

Number Effective

Date




Declaration

2.7 acres generally bounded by Pacific Avenue to the north, 122 feet to the centerline of Magnolia Avenue to the west, the Southern California Edison easement to the south and 1,324 feet to the centerline of Gilbert Street to the east

County Annexation (annexation was not approved) Designated property for Low Density Residential land use (no previous General Plan designation)


Declaration

30 acres generally bounded by Pacific Place to the north, Gilbert Street to the east, Katella Avenue to the south and 156 feet to the centerline of Markev Street to the west

County Annexation (annexation was not approved) Designated property for Low Medium-Density Residential land use (no previous General Plan designation) and amended Table LU-4 and Figure LU-5


Declaration

0.3 acres at the northwest corner of Katella Avenue and Berry Avenue

County Annexation (annexation was not approved) Designated property for Low-Medium Density Residential land use (no previous General Plan designation)

11 2004-00416 2005-097 7/7/05 Yes EIR 329 32.3 acres located approximately 1,400 feet south of the intersection of Santa Ana Canyon Road and Deer Canyon Road, between Festival Drive to the east and Eucalyptus Drive to the west

Amended land use designation: Estate Density Residential to Low Density Residential and amended Green Element

12 2005-00436 2005-176 9/23/05 Yes EIR 331 Citywide Amended Safety Element

City of Anaheim




Case Number City

Council Resolution

Number Effective

Date




330 and Mitigated Negative

Declaration

Platinum Triangle Amended the Land Use Element to increase the amount of commercial development permitted in the Platinum Triangle

14 2004-00420 2005-207 11/25/05 Yes SEIR 332 Platinum Triangle Amended land use designation: Office High to Mixed Use (Fire Training Site), amended the Land Use Element to increase the amount of residential and commercial development permitted in the Platinum Triangle and amended the Circulation Element

15 2005-00434 2005-211 11/25/05 Yes SEIR 332 and Addendum

Platinum Triangle Amended land use designation: Office High to Mixed Use (Lennar A-Town)


Declaration and Addendum

29.1 acres in The Anaheim Resort between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street, and Disney Way and Katella Avenue (Anaheim GardenWalk)

Amended the Land Use Element to modify the permitted density of development for the GardenWalk Overlay

17 2006-00441 2006-088 6/9/06 Yes EIR 331, SEIR 1278, SEIR

1716

A 1.45-mile planned segment of Jamboree Road, west of and parallel to the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241) between Weir Canyon Road and the southern City limits.

Amended Circulation Element to remove Jamboree Road from the Planned Roadway Network

City of Anaheim




Case Number City

Council Resolution

Number Effective

Date




330

Citywide Amended Land Use, Circulation, Green and Growth Management Elements (minor modifications/revisions)

19 2006-00442 2006-206 9/22/06 No Mitigated Negative

Declaration

Anaheim Resort Specific Plan

Amended Land Use Element to allow residential units in conjunction with a minimum 300-room full-service hotel in the Commercial Recreation designation

20 2006-00448 2007-053 5/24/07 N/A Mitigated Negative



Amended Land Use Element to allow wholly-residential uses in the Commercial Recreation designation Repealed 11/27/2007 by City Council Resolution No. 2007-226

21 2006-00451 2007-063 6/7/07 No Negative Declaration

1126 West Lincoln Avenue and 1221 West Center Street

Amended land use designation: Low Density Residential to Mixed Use

22 2006-00449 2007-080 7/5/07 No SEIR 332 and Addendum

Platinum Triangle Amended Land Use Element to increase the amount of residential development permitted in the Platinum Triangle


2000 South State College Boulevard - Angel Stadium parking lot (0.7 acres) and 2337 South Manchester Avenue – Ponderosa Mobile Home Park (394 square feet)

Amended land use designation: Open Space to Mixed Use and designated property for Medium Density Residential land use (no previous General Plan designation)

City of Anaheim




Case Number City

Council Resolution

Number Effective

Date



24 2006-00445 2007-171 9/20/07 No SEIR 332 and Addendum

Platinum Triangle Amended the Land Use Element to increase the amount of commercial and office development permitted in the Platinum Triangle

25 2006-00446 2007-168 9/20/07 No EIR 335 Platinum Triangle Amended the Land Use Element to increase the number of dwelling units allowed in the Platinum Triangle


0.78-acres, having a frontage of 130 feet on the south side of Katella Avenue and located 170 feet west of the centerline of Bayless Street

Amended land use designation: General Commercial to Medium Density Residential

27 2007-00454 2007-235 1/10/08 N/A SEIR 334 Platinum Triangle Amended the Land Use Element to increase the amount of development allowed and change land use designations in the Platinum Triangle and made related amendments to the Circulation, Green and Public Services and Facilities Elements Repealed 10/14/2008 by City Council Resolution No. 2008-178


Declaration

1.85-acres located on the south side of the Riverside Freeway (SR-91) right-of-way with a frontage of 682 feet along the Riverside Freeway, north of Santa Ana Canyon Road, west of Solomon Drive and 1,357 feet east of the centerline of Via Cortez

Amended land use designation: Low Density Residential to General Commercial

City of Anaheim




Case Number City

Council Resolution

Number Effective

Date




Portion A: 1.35-acres located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Dale Avenue (2800 - 2816 West Lincoln Avenue) Portion B: 0.82-acres having a frontage of 150 feet on the west side of Dale Avenue and located 310 feet south of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue (121 and 131 South Dale Avenue)

Portion C: 0.82-acres, having a frontage of 150 feet on the west side of Dale Avenue and located 460 feet south of the centerline of Lincoln Avenue (125-137 South Dale Avenue)

Amended land use designation: Corridor Residential to Medium Density Residential

30 2008-00466 Ord 6098 4/3/08 N/A N/A - Initiative does not require

CEQA

The Anaheim Resort SOAR Initiative – Amended the Introduction and the Land Use Element to generally prohibit residential development within The Anaheim Resort unless environmental and economic analyses is prepared and the request receives both City Council and City voter approval

City of Anaheim




Case Number City

Council Resolution

Number Effective

Date




0.57-acres located at the southeast corner of La Palma Avenue and East Street, having a frontage of 150 feet on the south side of La Palma Avenue and 230 feet on the east side of East Street

Amended land use designation: Low-Medium Residential to General Commercial


Declaration


Amended the Land Use Element to add a new density designation to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan

33 2008-00467 2009-141 9/10/09 N/A Mitigated Negative

Declaration

Citywide Amended the Housing Element in its entirety


Declaration

401 West Carl Karcher Way and 1325 North Anaheim Boulevard

Amended land use designation: Office Low and Industrial to General Commercial (Karcher Site)


407-425 South Anaheim Boulevard

Amended land use designation: Mixed Use to Medium Density Residential


518-538 South Anaheim Boulevard

Amended land use designation: Low Medium Density Residential to Medium Density Residential

37 2010-00480 2010-162 10/28/10 N/A EIR 343 Douglass Road, south of Katella Avenue

Amended Circulation Element Figure C-1 "Planned roadway Network" to add Douglass Rd, south of Katella Avenue as a Secondary Arterial

City of Anaheim




Case Number City

Council Resolution

Number Effective

Date



38 2008-00471 2010-187 11/25/10 No EIR 339 Platinum Triangle Amended the Land Use Element to increase the amount of development allowed and change land use designations in the Platinum Triangle and made related amendments to the Circulation, Green and Public Services and Facilities Elements



29.1 acres in The Anaheim Resort between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street, and Disney Way and Katella Avenue (Anaheim GardenWalk)

Amended the Land Use Element to modify the square feet of specialty retail, restaurants and entertainment uses permitted in the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay

City of Anaheim


The County of Orange requires that the City notify the County of certain zoning actions. The following checklist will determine the need for notification. The County will be notified of any “yes” responses to questions 1 through 4: 1. Does this zoning action involve adoption or amendment to either (a) the Anaheim General Plan, (b) a Specific Plan, or (c) a Reclassification? Yes No __ IF YES, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: 2. Does this zoning action involve land located east of the alignment of Weir Canyon Road? Yes No 3. Does this zoning action involve a residential project over 99 acres or 99 units in size? Yes No __ 4. Does this zoning action involve a non-residential project over

29 acres or a non-residential project with more than 99 employees? Yes __ No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite,

cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

2) A list of “Supporting Information Sources” must be attached and other sources used or individuals

contacted should be cited in the Narrative Summary for each section. 3) Response Column Heading Definitions:

a) Substantial Change in Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions applies when substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. When a checklist question receives this response, a subsequent or supplemental EIR must be prepared.

b) Substantial Change in Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions applies where

substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. When a checklist question receives this response, a subsequent or supplemental EIR must be prepared.

c) New Information Showing Potentially New or Increased Significant Effects applies where

new information, including regulatory changes, results in a potentially significant new impact or a potential increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effect. When a checklist question receives this response, a subsequent or supplemental EIR must be prepared.

d) Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of

an EIR some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. No additional environmental analysis is required beyond that provided in the certified EIR.

City of Anaheim


e) No Impact applies where a project does not create an impact in that category. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one proposed (e.g., the project falls outside of a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to a tiering, program EIR, Master EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15062(c)(3)(D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures

Incorporated”, describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

4) Incorporate into the checklist any references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., the

General Plan, zoning ordinance). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

5) The explanation of each issue should identify:

a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.

City of Anaheim


This page has been left intentionally blank.

City of Anaheim


ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

Subsequent or Supplemental EIR Required No Additional Environmental

Analysis Required

Substantial Change in

Project Requiring Major EIR Revisions


Circumstances Requiring Major EIR Revisions

New Information

Showing Potentially

New or Increased Significant

Effects

Less Than Significant Impact/No

Changes or New

Information Requiring

Preparation of an EIR

No Impact

I. AESTHETICS: Would the project:

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 or local scenic expressway, scenic highway, or eligible 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?

Narrative Summary:

Questions a through d – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites listed in Tables 1 and 2 to be consistent with existing General Plan land use designations and analyzed in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts to aesthetics were discussed in Section 5.1, Aesthetics, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to aesthetics. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated buildout of the housing opportunity sites consistent with the General Plan, aesthetic impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and the forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220 (g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?

d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location of nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Narrative Summary: Questions a, c through e – No Impact. A review of the Department of Conservation Farmland Maps for Orange County indicated that there are areas designated as Prime and Unique Farmland by the California Resources Agency within the City. However, these areas are not currently designated for agricultural use by the City’s General Plan. Because the proposed zone changes would not result in the redesignation of any of these agricultural areas, no impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project. In addition, none of the sites proposed for rezoning contain any forestry resources. Therefore, this issue will not be discussed in the SEIR. Question b – No Impact. There is no land currently under a Williamson Act contract in the City and the actions associated with this project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural uses. Therefore, no impacts to agriculture or forestry resources would occur as a result of the proposed project and this issue will not be discussed in the sEIR.

III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

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 non-attainment 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?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

Narrative Summary:

Question a. Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed zone changes are consistent with the adopted General Plan and have been assumed in the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMDs) adopted 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and the proposed 2012 AQMP. As a result, no additional environmental analysis related to consistency with the AQMP is necessary.

Question b through d. New Information Showing Potentially New or Increased Significant Effects. In March 2012, the current version of ATAM was approved by the OCTA for use as a local traffic model. ATAM is required to be updated every eight years to stay consistent with regional socioeconomic databases. With the previous version expiring September, 2010, the current version of ATAM reflects the most recent regional socioeconomic database. The previous version was used for the analysis in EIR No. 330, including air quality analysis. As part of the SEIR, a new air quality analysis will be performed to determine if the potential mobile and stationary air emissions associated with the proposed project would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. If any potential violation is identified, further evaluation in the SEIR is required to identify mitigation measures to reduce impacts to below a level of significance, if feasible.

Question e – Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The opportunity sites are currently planned for residential uses by the adopted General Plan. Residential land uses would not involve handling of large amounts of solid waste, chemicals associated with heavy industry, or other uses that may generate objectionable odors. The proposed rezoning project generally proposes the same types of land uses assumed for these sites as the 2004 General Plan, none of which would generate offensive odors affecting substantial numbers of people. No new impacts relating to odors would be associated with rezoning of the Housing Opportunity Sites.

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or 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?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance?

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?

Narrative Summary:

Questions a through d – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts to biological resources were discussed in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to biological resources. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites, impacts to biological resources resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and/or identified on the Qualified Historic Structures list of the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan (July 20, 1999)?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines?

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?

d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Narrative Summary: Question a through d – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts to cultural resources were discussed in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements, General Plan goals and policies, and mitigation measures outlined in the 2004 GP EIR, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to cultural resources. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated buildout of the housing opportunity sites, impacts to cultural resources resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:

a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 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 on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

d) Be located on expansive soil, as described by Section 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to life or property?

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

Question a through e – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts related to geology and soils were discussed in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to geology and soils. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, impacts related to geology and soils resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Would the project

a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Questions a and b – New Information Showing Potentially New or Increased Significant Effects. On December 30, 2009, the Natural Resources Agency adopted changes to the CEQA Guidelines to address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impacts of a project. These changes became effective on March 18, 2010. At the time of the 2004 GP EIR’s writing and adoption, GHG emissions were not a topic of environmental concern for CEQA. However, passage of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act, in 2006 brought climate action planning to the forefront of planning and CEQA. Currently, the City of Anaheim does not have a comprehensive climate plan. However, the adopted General Plan has number of polices that serve to reduce GHG emissions.

Pursuant to the recommendations of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and methodology proposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the SEIR will quantify project-related GHG emissions from area sources, transportation, electricity, and waste disposal. The GHG analysis will also discuss potential global climate change impacts, the effects of GHG emissions, and a history of GHG emissions regulation in California. Project consistency with statewide GHG emissions reduction strategies and measures taken by the City to reduce GHG in the adopted General Plan will also be reviewed.

Implementation of the proposed project would allow land uses that would increase the number of people living and working in the City of Anaheim. These additional residents and workers would generate additional vehicle trips. Construction of projects built pursuant to the proposed project would also generate additional vehicle trips. All of these activities have the potential to generate short-term and long-term GHG emissions that could affect local and regional air quality. An air quality analysis will be prepared as part of the SEIR to determine the project’s potential GHG impacts and appropriate mitigation measures will be developed.

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project:

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

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 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport), would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport, or helistop, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

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?

i) Include a new or retrofitted stormwater treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), e.g., water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands, etc.), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g., increased vectors and noxious odors)?

Narrative Summary:

Question a through i – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials were discussed in Section 5.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: 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)?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-site or off-site?

d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-site or off-site?

e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of 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 or mudflow? k) Substantially degrade water quality by

contributing pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling, or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas?

l) Substantially degrade water quality by discharge which affects the beneficial uses (i.e., swimming, fishing, etc.) of the receiving waters?

m) Potentially impact stormwater runoff from construction activities?

n) Potentially impact stormwater from post construction activities?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

o) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm?

p) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas?

Narrative Summary:

Question a through p – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Hydrology and water quality impacts were discussed in Section 5.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, hydrology and water quality impacts resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

X. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:

a) Physically divide an established community?

b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of any 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?

Narrative Summary: Question a through c – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Land use and planning impacts were discussed in Section 5.8, Land Use and Relevant Planning, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to land use and planning. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, land use and planning impacts resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

XI. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:

a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State?

b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

Narrative Summary: Questions a and b – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts to mineral resources were discussed in Section 5.9, Mineral Resources, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to mineral resources. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites, impacts to mineral resources resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

XII. NOISE: Would the project result in:

a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

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 (Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center or Fullerton Municipal Airport), would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport or helistop, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

Narrative Summary:

Questions a through d – New Information Showing Potentially New or Increased Significant Impacts. In March 2012, the current version of ATAM was approved by the OCTA for use as a local traffic model. ATAM is required to be updated every eight years to stay consistent with regional socioeconomic databases. With the previous version expiring September, 2010, the current version of ATAM reflects the most recent regional socioeconomic database. The previous version was used for the analysis in EIR No. 330, including the Noise Study. As part of the SEIR, a new Noise Study will be conducted to determine if the proposed project would result in substantial changes in noise levels. An evaluation in the SEIR is required to determine the level of significance of any impacts and to identify mitigation measures to reduce any identified significant impacts to below a level of significance, if feasible. Question e and f – Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in the 2004 GP EIR, the Fullerton Municipal Airport is located two miles from Anaheim. However, the 65 CNEL Noise Contour for Fullerton Airport does not extend into the City of Anaheim and no significant impacts related to airport noise are anticipated. There are no private airstrips in Anaheim. As discussed in the 2004 GP EIR, there are five heliports in the City that are utilized for helicopter take-off and landing. The 2004 GP EIR found that the implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.10-2, which requires developers to consult the most current available Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource, would result in impacts related to airport and heliport noise that are less than significant. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, no additional discussion of this issue in the SEIR is necessary.

XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:

a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)?

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Narrative Summary:

Questions a through c – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts related to population and housing were discussed in Section 5.12, Population and Housing, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to population and housing. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, impacts to population and housing resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

a) Fire protection?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? Narrative Summary: Questions a and b – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts related to police and fire services were discussed in Section 5.11, Police and Fire, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements, General Plan goals and policies, and mitigation measures outlined in the 2004 GP EIR, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to police and fire services. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, impacts to police and fire services resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted. Questions c and e – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts related to schools and libraries were discussed in Section 5.13, Public Services and Facilities, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to schools or libraries. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, impacts to schools and libraries resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted. Questions d – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts related to parks were discussed in Section 5.14, Recreation, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to parks. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, impacts to parks resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

XV. RECREATION: Would the project:

a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Narrative Summary: Questions a and b – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts related to parks were discussed in Section 5.14, Recreation, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to recreational facilities. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, impacts related to recreational facilities resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project:

a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?

b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?

c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that results in substantial safety risks?

d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses?

e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or

programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance of such facilities?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

Narrative Summary: Questions a, b, d, e, and f – New Information Showing New or Increased Significant Impacts. In March 2012, the current version of ATAM was approved by OCTA for use as a local traffic model. ATAM is required to be updated every eight years to stay consistent with regional socioeconomic databases. With the previous version expiring September, 2010, the current version of ATAM reflects the most recent regional socioeconomic database. The previous version was used for the analysis in EIR No. 330. A new comprehensive traffic impact study will be conducted as part of the SEIR to evaluate the traffic generation and distribution associated with the Proposed Project to determine where significant congestion is likely to occur. An evaluation of the Proposed Project in the SEIR is required to determine if the Proposed Project will create any impacts as compared to the 2004 adopted General Plan, and, if so, to identify mitigation measures to reduce any identified significant impacts to below a level of significance, if feasible.

Question c – Less than Significant Impact.

As discussed in the 2004 GP EIR, the Fullerton Municipal Airport is located two miles from Anaheim. There are no private airstrips in Anaheim. As discussed in the 2004 GP EIR, there are five heliports in the City that are utilized for helicopter take-off and landing. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, no additional discussion of this issue in the SEIR is necessary.

XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment

requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?

b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities (including sewer (wastewater) collection facilities) or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project (including large scale developments as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and described in Question No. 26 of the Environmental/ Project Information Form) from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?

e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

h) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to electricity?

i) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to natural gas?

j) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to telephone service?

k) Result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations related to television service/reception?

Narrative Summary: Questions a through k – No changes or New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR. The proposed project involves the rezoning of the housing opportunity sites to be consistent with land use designations identified for those sites in the 2004 GP EIR. Impacts related to utilities and service systems were discussed in Section 5.13, Public Services and Facilities, of the 2004 GP EIR, which concluded that upon implementation of regulatory requirements and General Plan goals and policies, buildout of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts related to public services and facilities. Because the 2004 GP EIR contemplated development of the housing opportunity sites for residential and mixed uses, impacts related to public services and facilities resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant and no further analysis in the SEIR is warranted.

XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential to

degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)

c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

City of Anaheim




Analysis Required





New Information

Showing Potentially


Effects


Changes or New



No Impact

Narrative Summary: Question a – Less than Significant Impact. For the reasons stated above, the Proposed Project would not create any new or more severe impacts related to biological resources and cultural resources as compared to the 2004 General Plan Project, and, therefore, the 2004 Certified EIR adequately addressed potential impacts related to biological resources and cultural resources. Therefore, no impacts to biological or cultural resources would occur with the Proposed Project as compared to the 2004 General Plan. Questions b and c – New Information Showing Potentially New or Increased Significant Effects. As discussed above, the Proposed Project could result in potentially new or increased significant impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation/traffic. The project has the potential to result in cumulative impacts and affect the human environment. Because of this potential for significant adverse effects, all of these issues will be analyzed in the SEIR.

City of Anaheim


Fish and Game Determination (Per Section 21089(b) of the Public Resources Code, all project applicants and public agencies subject to the California Environmental Quality Act shall pay a Fish and Game filing fee for each project that would adversely affect wildlife resources.)* Based on the responses contained in this Environmental Checklist, there is no evidence that the proposed project has a potential for a change that would adversely affect wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Has the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CCR 753.5 (d) been rebutted by substantial evidence? X Yes (Certificate of Fee Exemption) No (Pay fee) *Note: Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)(2)(A) states that projects that are Categorically

Exempt from CEQA are also exempt from filing fee.

City of Anaheim


REFERENCES CITED Anaheim, City of. 2004, May (amended). City of Anaheim General Plan. Anaheim, City of. 2004, May (amended). Anaheim Municipal Code. California Department of Conservation. 2002 California Important Farmland Map. The Planning Center. 2004, May. Anaheim General Plan and Zoning Code Update Final

Environmental Impact Report No. 330 (2004 GP EIR).

City of Anaheim


Appendix A

Residential Opportunity and Mixed Use Overlay Zone Parcels

City of Anaheim


This page intentionally left blank.

180-181

162

161

160158-159

125-129

W BALL RD

W LINCOLN AVE

W ORANGE AVE

S DAL

E AVE

S KNO

TT AV

E

S WEST

ERN A

VE

S MAG

NOLIA

AVE

W BROADWAY

S BEA

CH BL

VD

N DAL

E AVE

KNOT

T AVE

N BEA

CH BL

VD

N WES

TER N

AVE

W LINCOLN AVEW LINCOLN AVE

S BEA

CH BL

VD

LOLA AVE

S WE B

STER

AVEW ROME AVE

W FAIRCREST DR

W YALE AVE

W ACADEMY AVE

W DEL MONTE DR

S BAK

ER STS V

ICKI LN

S VELA

RE ST

S BEL

AIR ST

S HAL

LIDAY

ST

W POLK AVE

S SHE

RRILL

ST

S SHIE

LDS D

R

S DELA

NO ST

W TYLER AVE

W ORANGE AVE

S GAIN

ST

S BRO

DER S

T

S DOY

LE DR

W DE VOY DR

S HAY

WARD

ST

S SYLV

AN ST

S VER

ONA S

T

S LOM

A LIND

A DR

W ELMLAWN DRW GLEN HOLLY DR

W KEYS LNS BRO

NWYN

DR

W VALLEJO DR

S KEN

MORE

ST

W LINDACITA LN

W HEFFRON DR

S BIRC

HLEA

F DR

W LYNROSE DR

S WEST

CHEST

ER DR S LAX

ORE S

T

N BEL

AIR ST

W OLINDA LN

S MON

UMEN

T STS G

RAND

AVE

S DAN

BROO

K DR

S OAK

HAVE

N DR

W ONEIDA AVE

S FER

N AVE

W RAVENSWOOD DR

S EAS

T GAT

ES ST

N GRA

ND AV

E

S BEN

WOOD

DR

S TOP

ANGA

DR

S MAC

DUFF

ST

S CAN

OGA S

T

S COU

RTRIG

HT ST

W SAVANNA ST

W GRACIOSA LN

W CABOT DR

S HAR

DING A

VE

W MUNGALL DR

S MAS

TERS

LN

S STIN

SON S

T

S PAR

KVIEW

ST

W ARIEL PL

W TOLA AVE

W PASO ROBLES DR

W WE

STHAVEN DR

W DANBROOK AVE

W BRIDGEPORT AVE

S HAM

PTON

ST

W TERANIMAR DRS KOU

RI LN

W CONLEY AVE

S YAN

A DR

W ROWLAND AVE

W AIDA LN

S GAY

MONT

ST

W SKYWOOD CIR

W ROWLAND CIR

S SHA

RON C

IR

W LORENA DR

W RUNYON PL

S TEX

ELLA C

T

HARDING CIR

S WAS

CO RD

S SCO

TT LN

W ROVEN AVE

S BEA

CHY P

L

W STONYBROOK DR

S COU

RSON

DR

W TROJAN PL

W CHAIN AVE

S WEST

VALE

DRW FLOYD AVE

W SERENO PL

W MERLE PL

N SYR

ACUS

E ST

S NEW

CAST

LE DR

S IRA

CT

W CLEARBROOK LN

W CANOGA PL

N LA R

EINA C

IR

S RAM

BLEW

OOD D

R

W LANEROSE DR

S OAK

CREST

PL

S ROM

E PL

W DEERWOOD DR

S OAK

WILD

E DR

S SHE

LLI DR

W WESTHAVEN DR

S KEN

MORE

ST

W ROME AVE

S COU

RSON

DR

W WESTHAVEN DR

S DAN

BROO

K DR

W KEYS LN

W TERANIMAR DR

W STONYBROOK DR

W BRIDGEPORT AVE

S GRA

ND AV

E

S VICK

I LN

W BRIDGEPORT AVE

W SKYWOOD CIR

W ROME AVE

W LYNROSE DR

W LANEROSE DR

W OLINDA LN

W ST O NYBROOK DR

W DE VOY DRW LYNROSE DR

S BRO

DER S

T

S VER

ONA S

T

S SHE

RRILL

ST

LOLA AVE

S SYLV

AN ST

S GAY

MONT

STW GLEN HOLLY D R

W DEL MONTE DR

S SHIE

LDS D

R

S GAIN

ST

W KEYS LN

S OAK

HAVE

N DR

S SYLV

AN ST

S WEST

CHEST

ER DR

W POLK AVE

S S L

ASSEN

CT

W

W CH

ERYLLYN LN

W OCEAN VIA

W GREENTREE CIR

N RICH

MONT

DR

W EUREKA DR S MAR

IN CT

W MEADOWVIEW LN

N RIDG

EWAY

ST

S NEV

EEN L

N

S ARO

N PL

W HAY WARD S

T

W BELLA CT

W GLEN IVY LN

N LAU

REN

WAY

S VILL

A SOM

OA LN

S CABERNET CIR

3303

Residential Opportunity andMixed Use Overlay Zone Parcels

Map Location °0 500 1,000

Feet

City of AnaheimPlanning Technology

August 2, 2012Housing Opportunity Sites

from 2006-2014 Housing Element Map 1 of 5

Key to Features

Residential Opportunity

Mixed Use

177-179

130-133, 135

174

173, 175, 176

163-172

W BALL RD

W BROADWAY

S BRO

OKHU

RST S

TN B

ROOK

HURS

T ST

W LINCOLN AVE

W CRESCENT AVE

W LINCOLN AVE

W CRESCENT AVE

W ORANGE AVE

S VAL

LEY ST

W VICTORIA AVE

S NUT

WOOD

ST

S TRID

ENT S

T

N MUL

LER ST

W RANDOM DR

S ARC

HER S

T

N CRE

SCEN

T WAY

W EMBASSY AVE

S FAN

N ST

W TEDMAR AVE

W ALAMEDA AVE

S EMP

IRE ST

W ELM AVE

W WILLOW AVE

W CRONE AVE

N CAR

OL DR

W SIVA AVE

S ECH

O ST

N DAH

LIA DR

N ALA

DDIN

DR

S THIS

TLE R

DN K

ATHR

YN DR

S BRO

ADVIE

W ST

S FAL

CON S

T

S ROS

EBAY

ST

S AGA

TE ST

N BER

NIECE

DR

W COLCHESTER DR

W W EST MONT DR

W CATALINA AVE

S CAM

ELLIA

ST

W HIAWATHA AVE

W STONYBROOK DR

N MON

TERE

Y ST

N LIND

SAY S

T

N BIRC

HER S

T

W NIOBE AVE

S NEP

TUNE

ST

W BIENVILLE AVE

N SIES

TA ST

S PRIM

ROSE

ST

S HAC

IENDA

ST

W DIANE WAY

W BEACON AVE

N RAN

CHITO

ST

N MAN

OR ST

W CHATEAU AVE

S E MER A

LD ST

N VAL

LEY ST

S FLORETTE ST

W PENHALL WAY

W JUNO AVE

W BROWNWOOD AVE

W VANCOUVER DR

S CLA

RA ST

N FAIR

HAVE

N ST

W JUNO PL

N VEN

TURA

ST

N PAR

KWOO

D ST

S GRE

ENWI

CH ST

W SUNSET AVES R

AMON

A ST

N ALA

DDIN

ST

W ELM PL

W MINERVA AVE

W LODI PL

S KINGS COURT DR

S BA R

NSD A

LE ST

S ANT

HONY

ST

N EUC

LID WAY

W BOWLING ST

W CLEARBROOK LN W ALOMAR AVE

S PAR

K C IR

W WOODLEY AVE

S FAN

N PL

S BRE

NTWO

OD PL

W SUNRISE AVES NINA PL

S GRE

ENWI

CH LN

W CORPORATE WAY

W BAYPORT CIR

S RAM

ONA C

T

W HILBERS RD

W LINDSAY RD

N MAR

IPOSA

PL

W NUTWOOD PL

W VALLEY PL

W LAUREL PL

S ECH

O PL

W JUNO AVE

S NUT

WOOD

ST

W CLEARBROOK LN

S NUT

WOOD

ST

S PRIM

ROSE

ST

W CHATEAU AVE

W MINERVA AVE

S HAC

IENDA

ST

W CHATEAU AVE

S AGA

TE ST

S CAMELLIA ST

S ARC

HER S

T

W CRONE AVE

W CHATEAU AVE

S AGA

TE ST

S PRIM

ROSE

ST

S ECH

O ST

S BRO

ADVIE

W ST

S EMP

IRE ST

W ELM AVE

W BEACON AVE

S GRE

ENWI

CH ST

S FAL

CON S

T

S EMP

IRE ST

S CAM

ELLIA

ST

W NIOBE AVE

W BEACON AVE

S FLO

RETT

E ST

S FAL

CON S

T

W BEACON AVE

S AGA

TE ST

S EME

RALD

ST

N ROB

WAY

S COR

NWA L

L DR

W DOVECOTE LN

S COV

ENTR

Y DR

W HASTINGS WAY

W LAFAYETTE DR

S LIN H

A VEN

CIR

ROCKET

S HEA

RTWO

OD W

AY

N DA R

TMOU

TH W

A Y

W C HERRYWOO D LN

N WAK

E FOR

EST DR

W LIVERPOOL LN

S MAR

BEYA P

L

S MILL

S END

W HARTFORD PL

W ESSEX CIR

ROB WAY

W BANBURY CIR

W CHURCHILL CIR

S CAM

PBELL

DR

CHERRYWOOD LN

W AVON CIR

N ROB

WAY

3303


Map Location

°0 420 840

Feet


Mixed UseCity of Anaheim

Planning TechnologyAugust 2, 2012

Housing Opportunity Sitesfrom 2006-2014 Housing Element

Map 2 of 5

|57

90-9199-100

108

14-19

40

52

92-98

64-65

154-155

189-193

34-36

28

102-107

1-5, 7, 8

53

117-123

187-188

9-13

24, 26

61-62

184-186

204-211

23

57, 63

66-71

32

197-201

30

202-203

109-116

3342-45

E LINCOLN AVE

S EAST ST

S SUN

KIST S

T

E SOUTH ST

S STAT

E COL

LEGE B

LVD

E BROADWAY

E WAGNER AVE

W BROADWAY

W LINCOLN AVE

N HARBOR BLVD

N EAST ST

N ANAHEIM BLVD

S HARBOR BLVD

S ANAHEIM BLVD

S HARBOR BLVD

S HARBOR BLVD

E BROADWAY

S ANAHEIM BLVDS OLIVE ST

E SOUTH ST

E SANTA ANA ST

S LEMON ST

S CITRON ST

W SOUTH ST

W WATER ST

S KROEGER STS MELROSE ST

E CENTER ST

S HILD

A ST

S OHIO ST

W SANTA ANA ST

W CYPRESS ST

W VERMONT AVE

E SYCAMORE ST

W ELM ST

N LEMON ST

S RESH ST

E TURIN AVE

S BOND ST

N OLIVE ST

S JANSS ST

S ELDER ST

E WILLOW ST

W SYCAMORE ST

E ELM ST

S DICKEL ST

E ALDEN AVE

S RESE

DA ST

W ALBERTA ST

S LIME ST

N EMILY ST

W WILHELMINA ST

N CLAUDINA ST

S DAKOTA ST

N RESH ST W OAK ST

S GROVE AVE

E WESTPORT DR

S WAYSIDE ST

E NYON AVE

S COL

T ST

E BETHEL D R

E CEDAR ST

E WARD TER

E VIKING AVE

S PINE ST

E ADELE ST

E CHELSEA DR

E ALBERTA ST N LARCH ST

N PINE ST

N VINE ST

S HELENA ST

S ROSE ST

S VER

DE ST

E BASSETT WAY

N ZEYN ST

E ARLEE PL

N ROSE ST

S DORCHESTER ST

E PARADISE RD

N BUSH ST

S BARNETT ST

E LIZBETH AVE

S LAR

AMIE

ST

N JANSS ST

S REVERE ST

S NOR

DICA S

T

E VERMONT AVE

S PRIS

CILLA

ST

E CYPRESS ST

E VALENCIA AVE

S DAWN ST

S AVOCADO ST

E VIRGINIA AVE

S MAN

COS P

L

E AMES AVE

S HAVEN DR

E OSHKOSH AVE

S DOVER ST

S INDIANA ST

E OAK ST

E FLORIDA PL

S ASH ST

E SEVILLE AVE

S CLEMENTINE ST

E ARIZONA PL

E JAMISON ST

E NARDA STN LA PLAZA

N PHILADELPHIA ST

S PHILADELPHIA ST

W BELLEVUE DRW IRVING PL

E LACY AVE

S CLAUDINA ST

E MAVERICK AVE

E PALADIN AVE

S PER

EGRIN

E ST

E FRONTAGE RD

S ROSE PL

S ATCHISON ST

S MCCLOUD ST

S OAK

STON

E WAY

S C LIFFROSE ST

E ELSIENA WAY

S DATE ST

E STANDISH AVE

N PINE WAY

E CHARLESTOWN DR

E WATER ST

E ALCOVE WAY

E CALIFORNIA PL

E SUSANNE ST

W CHARTRES ST

N EVERGREEN ST

S 42ND ST

E HUKEE AVE

W PROVENTIAL DR

E SAVOY AVE

S TOR

RY P L

E DIANA AVE

E HAVEN DR

S JA M

BOLA

Y A S T

E OPAL AVE

S SHERWOOD DRE TRYON AVEE NORMAN AVE

S CHA

UCER

ST

W CHESTNUT ST

E CHARLOTTE AVE

E CHESTNUT ST

N VINTAGE LN

E TOPAZ AVE

E HILDA PL

E PURITAN LN

E CORTNEY WAY

S WAYSIDE PL

E VERDE PL

S PLYM

OUTH

PL

E NORM PL

S CLAY

STS D

USTIN

PL

S TOW

ER CT

E VALENCIA ST

E DIANA DR

S ANN

IKA ST

E GELID AVE

S MAN

COS A

VE

E TYROL AVE

S LON

DON C

T

E STRONG PL

E HAMPSHIRE AVE

S NOR

DICA L

N

S LIVE OAK DR

S OLYM

PIA CT

S NEW

AVE

E AMES CIR

W HAMPSHIRE AVE

E PURITAN CIR

E PAT PL

E GELID CT

S MAYWOOD ST

E DIANA PL

E NORMAN PL

E ALPHA LN

S NOR

MAND

Y CT

S OLA

NA W

AY

E NAPA PL

E CORTNEY PL

E NURA PL

E NYON PL

W LEONORA ST

E GARY PL

E WESTPORT CIR

E MAUERHAN PL

S CEN

PLA W

AY

E LAMBDA LN

S CONIFER ST

E CYPRIEN WAY

S DOVE PL

N PINE PL

E VERMONT AVE

S BARNETT ST

S MELROSE ST

E TURIN AVE

E TURIN AVE

S ELDER ST

E CYPRESS ST

S ROSE ST

E VIRGINIA AVE

S CLEMENTINE ST

S WAYSIDE ST

E ADELE ST

E LIZBETH AVE

E STANDISH AVE S HILD

A ST

S ASH

ST

S HELENA ST

E VERMONT AVE

S DICKEL ST

E DIANA AVE

E ALDEN AVE

S MAN

COS P

L

E CYPRESS ST

S PLYM

OUTH

PL

E WARD TER

W BELLE V UE DR

N ROSE ST

E CENTER ST

E WATER ST

E CENTER ST E WESTPORT DRE WILLOW STE ELM ST

S DAWN ST

E VERMONT AVE

S MCCLOUD STS WAYSIDE ST

S MAN

COS P

L

N VINE ST

S BARNETT ST

E OAK ST

S SARAH WAY

PRIVATE ST

S MICH AEL WAY

S BUSH ST

E CHARTRES ST

S VINE ST

S SENE CA CIR

S ROSE ST

E CITY CT

E JASON DR

N PAULINE ST

S CED

ARWO

OD LN

S

E SUGARWOOD LN

S CAMPHOR ST

S PAULA LN

E FIGWOOD LN

PRIVATE ST

PRIVATE ST

3303



Feet


October 3, 2012Housing Opportunity Sites


Key to Features


Mixed Use

§̈5

|57

219-221

136-152

E KATELLA AVE

E CERRITOS AVE

S HAR

BOR B

LVD

S LEW

IS ST

S WEST

ST

W KATELLA AVE

E ORANGEWOOD AVES H

ASTE

R ST

S MANCHESTER AVE

S STAT

E COL

LEGE B

LVD

W ORANGEWOOD AVES A

NAHE

IM BL

VD

S SUNKIS

T ST

S DISN

EYLA

ND DR

E GENE AUTRY WAYS C

LEMEN

TINE S

T W DISNEY WAYE HOWELL AVE

W MANCHESTER AVE

S MANCHESTER AVE

S LEW

IS ST

S CLEM

ENTIN

E ST

W DISNEY WAY

S ANAHEIM WAY

W WILKEN WAY

S SINC

LAIR

ST

E SIMMONS AVE

S SPIN

NAKE

R ST

ANAHEIM WAY

W MIDWAY DR

S OER

TLEY D

RS SANTA CRUZ ST

S VER

N ST

W CLIFFWOOD AVE

S ALLE

C ST

S RAM

PART

ST

E LEATRICE LN

S CLA

U DINA

WA Y

S ANC

HOR S

TS MAL

LUL D

R

S VER

NON S

T

MARKET ST

W BLUEBELL AVE

E WAKEFIELD AVE

S UN ION S

T

S ZEY

N ST

E HOWELL AVE

S PAG

E CT

E PEARS ON AVE

W RICKY AVE

S JET

TY DR

S DAN

A ST

S DUP

ONT D

R

S MAR

KET S

T

E WILKEN WAY

W MAGIC WAY

S ACA

MA ST

S KAT

HY LN

S BRO

DEN S

T

S CAM

INO ST

W SIMMONS AVE

E ARTISAN CT

S MOU

NTAIN

VIEW

AVE

S P ARK L

N

W YUCCA AVE

W CERRI TOS AVE

S SPR

AGUE

LN

S EUG

ENE S

T

S MOR

GAN L

N

S NAU

TICAL

ST

S AUB

URN W

AY

S CAM

PTON

AVE

W DEWEY DR

S HAR

RIS CT

S MAD

RID ST

E TRIAD STS T

ROY S

T

S GRANVILLE DR

S JUN

E ST

S TOWNE CENTRE PLS K

IM W

AY

E CLIFFWOOD AVE

S MET

RO DR

W ELEANOR DR

S JEW

EL LN

S LEO

TA LN

S DAR

YL LN

E HOWELL AVE

S NAUTICAL STS JET

TY DR

S KAT

HY LN

W SIMMONS AVE

W CLIFFWOOD AVE

S EUG

ENE S

T

W SIMMONS AVE

S

S HOT

EL WA

Y

S ROC

KET

THOR

VIA KONA

CITRUS DRW CONVENTION WAY

RIGNE

Y WAY

PRIVA T E ST

E RIVERA LN

ATTLAS DR

W TRANSIT PLAZA

HUDS

ON PL

E LEATRICE LN

E PONDEROSA LN

STADIUM CROSSING

S NIKE

DR

S CLEM

ENTIN

E ST

W L AMARK LN

E JUPITER RD

E WAKEFIELD AVE

S STA

DIUM

CROS

SING

VIA TAHITI

E TANGERINE LN

VIA HILO DR

W CONVENTION WAY

3303



Feet

City of AnaheimPlanning TechnologySeptember 24, 2012

Housing Opportunity Sitesfrom 2006-2014 Housing Element Map 4 of 5

Key to Features


Mixed Use

|91

217

218/218a

E LA PALMA AVE

E MIRALOMA AVE

N TUSTIN AVE

E RIVERDALE AVE

N KRAEMER BLVD

N MILLER ST

E ORANGETHORPE AVE

N JEFF

ERSO

N ST

N LAKEVIEW AVE

S RICH

FIELD

RD

E SANTA ANA CANYON RDN GLASSELL ST

N RICH

FIELD

RD

E ORANGETHORPE AVE

N LAK

EVIEW

AVE

E FRONTERA ST

N RED GUM ST

E ADDI N GTON DR

E LA JOLLA ST

N FEE

ANA S

T

E JACKSON AVE

FEE AN

A ST

N KRAEMER PL

E ALDERDALE AVE

N VAN

BURE

N ST

E WHITE STAR AVE

N GROVE ST

OAK ST

N REDROCK ST

N DEERFIELD ST

N RICH

FIELD

RD

VINCENTE AVE

E RIVERVIEW AVE

E CORONADO ST

N KODIAK ST

N GAYLE ST

N OCEAN CIR

N BLUEROCK ST

E EAGLE DR

N PAGEANT ST

N SWEETWATER ST

N KENT STN ARMANDO ST

N PARTRIDGE ST

E BAINBRIDGE AVE

E BLUE STAR ST

N FOUNTAIN WAY

E LA CRESTA AVE

ATWOOD AVE

PETRA LN

N PAR

K VIST

A ST

N PHEASANT ST

N SANTA LUCIA ST

E CERRO V ISTA DR

LA PALOMA AVEN STARFIR E ST

N SANTA CECILIA ST

E AUTONETICS WAY

SIERRA VISTA AVE

N FINCH ST

N SUN

SET ST

N SHEPARD STS V

AN BU

REN S

T

N RAMONA ST

NANCITA CIR

E LANI AVE

N LANDFAIR ST

N BARRYKNOLL ST

N HUNDLEY ST

N RU THER FORD ST

N LANCE LN

N COSBY WAY

E BLUEWATER CIR

N MEADOWLARK LN

SIERRA MADRE CIR

E ROGUE DR

N STARLING WAY

E LA MESA ST

N SIMON CIR

E RICKER WAY

E RADCLIFFE AVE

N TORRENS ST

N VALLEY FORGE DR

N LA L O MA CIR

E CEENA CT

N VAN HORNE WAY

N ALIC

E WAY

N DYNAMICS ST

N TORRENS ST

E CORONADO ST

E ALDERDALE AVE

E CORONADO ST

N ARMANDO ST

N GROVE STPARK RDCLUB LN

N COMMUNITY DR

E ENT

ERPR

ISE DR

S LEOLA WAY

N PACIFICE NTER DR

W VIA FERRARI

PEACH ST

OAK S

T

N BARSTEN WAY

N JEFF

ERS O

N FR O

N TAG

E RD

E KENSINGTON AVE

N VIA PISAN VIA NAPOLI

3303



Feet


August 6, 2012Housing Opportunity Sites


Key to Features


Mixed Use