31a. Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 352 Volume 1 — Anaheim City Council, April 16, 2024 (part 1 of 5)

Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report No. 352
State Clearinghouse No. 2021100402

DisneylandForward
City of Anaheim
Volume 1

Prepared for City of Anaheim
Contact: Elaine Thienprasiddhi, AICP
Senior Planner
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, California 92805

Prepared by Psomas
Contact: Jennifer Marks
Principal, Environmental Services
5 Hutton Centre, Suite 300
Santa Ana, California 92707
September 2023

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

i Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page

Section 1.0 Executive Summary ......................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................. 1-1

1.2 Project Location and Setting ................................................................... 1-2

1.3 Project Description Summary ................................................................. 1-3

1.4 Project Alternatives ................................................................................. 1-8

1.5 Areas of Controversy/Issues to be Resolved .......................................... 1-9

1.6 Summary of Potential Environmental Effects, Mitigation Measures, and Level of Significance ...................................................................... 1-10 Section 2.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Project Background ................................................................................ 2-1

2.2 Previous Environmental Documentation ................................................. 2-2

2.3 The California Environmental Quality Act and The Environmental Impact Report ......................................................................................... 2-4

2.4 Purpose of this Subsequent Environmental Impact Report .................... 2-6

2.5 Scope of This Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report ............. 2-7

2.6 Documents Incorporated by Reference ................................................ 2-11

2.7 Public Review Process ......................................................................... 2-11

2.8 Notice of Preparation and Initial Study ................................................. 2-11

2.8.1 Public Environmental Impact Report Scoping Meeting ............. 2-22

2.8.2 Public Review Period ................................................................ 2-22 Section 3.0 Project Description .......................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................. 3-1

3.2 Project Location and Environmental Setting ........................................... 3-1

3.3 Project Background ................................................................................ 3-3

3.4 Project Objectives ................................................................................... 3-9

3.5 Project Description................................................................................ 3-10

3.5.1 Purpose ..................................................................................... 3-10

3.5.2 Project Characteristics
.............................................................. 3-11

3.6 Basis for Cumulative Impact Analysis ................................................... 3-27

3.7 Discretionary Actions ............................................................................ 3-28 Section 4.0 Environmental Setting ..................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Introduction to Environmental Setting ..................................................... 4-1

4.2 Environmental Setting ............................................................................. 4-1 DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

ii Table of Contents

4.3 Applicable Land Use Plans ..................................................................... 4-5

4.4 Cumulative Impacts Assumptions–Related Projects .............................. 4-6 Section 5.0 Impact Analysis ............................................................................................. 5.1-1

5.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................ 5.1-1

5.1.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ............. 5.1-1

5.1.2 Environmental Setting .............................................................. 5.1-5

5.1.3 Project Impact Analysis ............................................................ 5.1-7

5.1.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................... 5.1-22

5.1.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................. 5.1-23

5.1.6 Impact Summary .................................................................... 5.1-26

5.1.7 References ............................................................................. 5.1-27

5.2 Air Quality ............................................................................................ 5.2-1

5.2.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ............. 5.2-1

5.2.2 Environmental Setting ............................................................ 5.2-14

5.2.3 Project Impact Analysis .......................................................... 5.2-27

5.2.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................... 5.2-47

5.2.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................. 5.2-48

5.2.6 Impact Summary .................................................................... 5.2-57

5.2.7 References ............................................................................. 5.2-59

5.3 Biological Resources ........................................................................... 5.3-1

5.3.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ............. 5.3-1

5.3.2 Environmental Setting
.............................................................. 5.3-2

5.3.3 Project Impact Analysis ............................................................ 5.3-6

5.3.4 Cumulative Impacts ................................................................. 5.3-8

5.3.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................... 5.3-8

5.3.6 Impact Summary .................................................................... 5.3-10

5.3.7 References ............................................................................. 5.3-10

5.4 Cultural Resources .............................................................................. 5.4-1

5.4.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ............. 5.4-1

5.4.2 Environmental Setting .............................................................. 5.4-3

5.4.3 Project Impact Analysis .......................................................... 5.4-17

5.4.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................... 5.4-34

5.4.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................. 5.4-35

5.4.6 Impact Summary .................................................................... 5.4-38

5.4.7 References ............................................................................. 5.4-38

5.5 Energy ................................................................................................. 5.5-1

5.5.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ............. 5.5-1

5.5.2 Environmental Setting .............................................................. 5.5-5

5.5.3 Project Impact Analysis .......................................................... 5.5-10

5.5.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................... 5.5-17

5.5.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................. 5.5-18

5.5.6 Impact Summary
.................................................................... 5.5-24

5.5.7 References ............................................................................. 5.5-25

5.6 Geology and Soils................................................................................ 5.6-1

5.6.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ............. 5.6-1 DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

iii Table of Contents

5.6.2 Environmental Setting .............................................................. 5.6-4

5.6.3 Project Impact Analysis ............................................................ 5.6-9

5.6.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................... 5.6-14

5.6.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................. 5.6-15

5.6.6 Impact Summary .................................................................... 5.6-16

5.6.7 References ............................................................................. 5.6-17

5.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................ 5.7-1

5.7.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ............. 5.7-1

5.7.2 Environmental Setting ............................................................ 5.7-20

5.7.3 Project Impact Analysis .......................................................... 5.7-32

5.7.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................... 5.7-43

5.7.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................. 5.7-44

5.7.6 Impact Summary .................................................................... 5.7-56

5.7.7 References ............................................................................. 5.7-56

5.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................... 5.8-1

5.8.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ............. 5.8-1

5.8.2 Environmental Setting .............................................................. 5.8-5

5.8.3 Project Impact Analysis .......................................................... 5.8-10

5.8.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................... 5.8-21

5.8.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................. 5.8-22

5.8.6 Impact Summary
.................................................................... 5.8-24

5.8.7 References ............................................................................. 5.8-25

5.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................... 5.9-1

5.9.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ............. 5.9-1

5.9.2 Environmental Setting .............................................................. 5.9-7

5.9.3 Project Impact Analysis .......................................................... 5.9-13

5.9.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................... 5.9-21

5.9.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................. 5.9-22

5.9.6 Impact Summary .................................................................... 5.9-25

5.9.7 References ............................................................................. 5.9-27

5.10 Land Use and Planning ..................................................................... 5.10-1

5.10.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ........... 5.10-1

5.10.2 Project Impact Analysis ........................................................ 5.10-10

5.10.3 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................. 5.10-45

5.10.4 Mitigation Program ............................................................... 5.10-46

5.10.5 Impact Summary .................................................................. 5.10-47

5.10.6 References ........................................................................... 5.10-48

5.11 Noise ................................................................................................. 5.11-1

5.11.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ........... 5.11-1

5.11.2 Environmental Setting ............................................................ 5.11-6

5.11.3 Project Impact Analysis ........................................................ 5.11-13

5.11.4 Cumulative Impacts
............................................................. 5.11-27

5.11.5 Mitigation Program ............................................................... 5.11-29

5.11.6 Impact Summary .................................................................. 5.11-34

5.11.7 References ........................................................................... 5.11-35

5.12 Population and Housing ..................................................................... 5.12-1

5.12.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ........... 5.12-1 DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

iv Table of Contents

5.12.2 Environmental Setting ............................................................ 5.12-2

5.12.3 Project Impact Analysis .......................................................... 5.12-5

5.12.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................... 5.12-9

5.12.5 Mitigation Program ................................................................. 5.12-9

5.12.6 Impact Summary .................................................................... 5.12-9

5.12.7 References ........................................................................... 5.12-10

5.13 Public Services .................................................................................. 5.13-1

5.13.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ........... 5.13-1

5.13.2 Environmental Setting .......................................................... 5.13-15

5.13.3 Project Impact Analysis ........................................................ 5.13-22

5.13.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................. 5.13-28

5.13.5 Mitigation Program ............................................................... 5.13-30

5.13.6 Impact Summary .................................................................. 5.13-40

5.13.7 References ........................................................................... 5.13-42

5.14 Transportation.................................................................................... 5.14-1

5.14.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ........... 5.14-1

5.14.2 Environmental Setting .......................................................... 5.14-21

5.14.3 Project Impact Analysis ........................................................ 5.14-26

5.14.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................. 5.14-46

5.14.5 Mitigation Program ............................................................... 5.14-47

5.14.6 Impact Summary
.................................................................. 5.14-59

5.14.7 References ........................................................................... 5.14-60

5.15 Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................. 5.15-1

5.15.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ........... 5.15-1

5.15.2 Environmental Setting ............................................................ 5.15-3

5.15.3 Project Impact Analysis ........................................................ 5.15-11

5.15.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................. 5.15-18

5.15.5 Mitigation Program ............................................................... 5.15-18

5.15.6 Impact Summary .................................................................. 5.15-19

5.15.7 References ........................................................................... 5.15-20

5.16 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................ 5.16-1

5.16.1 Summary of Previous Environmental Documentation ........... 5.16-1

5.16.2 Environmental Setting .......................................................... 5.16-21

5.16.3 Project Impact Analysis ........................................................ 5.16-34

5.16.4 Cumulative Impacts ............................................................. 5.16-54

5.16.5 Mitigation Program ............................................................... 5.16-57

5.16.6 Impact Summary .................................................................. 5.16-67

5.16.7 References ........................................................................... 5.16-69 Section 6.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Project ............................................................. 6-1

6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................. 6-1

6.2 Summary of Previous E
nvironmental Documentation ............................ 6-2

6.3 Project Summary .................................................................................... 6-4

6.3.1 Project Characteristics ................................................................ 6-7

6.3.2 Project Objectives ..................................................................... 6-10

6.3.3 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ........................................ 6-12 DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

v Table of Contents

6.4 Alternatives Considered but Not Carried Forward For Detailed Analysis ................................................................................................ 6-14

6.4.1 No Project/No Further Development ......................................... 6-14

6.4.2 Alternative Site .......................................................................... 6-15

6.5 Alternatives to the Proposed Project .................................................... 6-17

6.5.1 No Project/Continuing Development ......................................... 6-17

6.5.2 Restrict Removal or Substantial Changes to Historic Features .................................................................................... 6-25

6.5.3 Development with No Theme Park East Overlay ...................... 6-31

6.6 Environmentally Superior Alternative .................................................... 6-38

6.7 References ........................................................................................... 6-41 Section 7.0 Other CEQA Considerations ........................................................................... 7-1

7.1 Effects Determined Not To Be Significant .............................................. 7-1

7.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would be Caused by the Project Should it be Implemented ................................... 7-1

7.3 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Action .................................. 7-2 Section 8.0 List of EIR Preparers and Persons Consulted ............................................... 8-1

8.1 EIR Preparers ......................................................................................... 8-1

8.1.1 City of Anaheim (Lead Agency) .................................................. 8-1

8.1.2 Psomas (EIR Consultant) ........................................................... 8-3

8.2 EIR Contributors ..................................................................................... 8-3

8.2.1 RRM Design Group (Shade and Shadow/Visual, Specific Plan) ............................................................................................ 8-3

8.2.2 Historic Resources Group (Historic Resources) ......................... 8-3

8.2.3 South Environmental (Historic Resources) ................................. 8-3

8.2.4 Ardurra (Hydraulic Analysis)
....................................................... 8-3

8.2.5 Veneklasen (Noise) ..................................................................... 8-3

8.2.6 Gibson Transportation Consulting (Transportation) .................... 8-3

8.3 Organizations and Persons Consulted ................................................... 8-3

8.3.1 Native American Tribe ................................................................ 8-3

8.4 Applicant ................................................................................................. 8-4

8.4.1 Walt Disney Company ................................................................ 8-4

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

vi Table of Contents
TABLES

Table Page

1-1 Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP for Disney Properties ............................... 1-4 1-2 Proposed Development Summary for Disney Properties ............................................... 1-6 1-3 Summary of Thresholds of Significance, Project Impacts, Mitigation, and Level of Significance After Mitigation ......................................................................................... 1-11 2-1 Notice of Preparation Comment Letters Received ....................................................... 2-12 3-1 General Plan Density Provisions for DRSP, ARSP, and HCSP ..................................... 3-3 3-2 Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP for Disney Properties ............................... 3-7 3-3 Proposed Development Summary for Disney Properties ............................................. 3-12 3-4 Anticipated Discretionary Actions ................................................................................. 3-28 4-1 List of Cumulative Off-Site Projects ............................................................................... 4-8

5.1-1 Modifications to the Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map and the DRSP and ARSP Zoning and Development Standards .................................................................................................................. 5.1-11

5.2-1 Air Quality Levels Measured at the Anaheim Monitoring Stations ............................ 5.2-16

5.2-2 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin....................... 5.2-17

5.2-3 California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards ............................................. 5.2-23

5.2-4 South Coast Air Quality Management District Criteria Pollutant Significant Emissions Thresholds ............................................................................................... 5.2-31

5.2-5 Construction Emissions Modeling Inputs .................................................................. 5.2-34

5.2-6 Proposed DisneylandForward Unmitigated Average Daily Regional Construction Emissions .................................................................................................................. 5.2-35

5.2-7 Proposed DisneylandForward Mitigated Average Daily Regional Construction Emissions .................................................................................................................. 5.2-35

5.2-8 Project Related Localized Daily Construction Emissions (lbs/Day)........................... 5.2-39

5.2-9 Operational Emissions Modeling Inputs .................................................................... 5.2-41

5.2-10 CAPCOA Measures .................................................................................................. 5.2-42

5.2-11 Net Daily Operational Emissions ............................................................................... 5.2-43

5.4-1 Buildings and Features on the Project Site Listed in the BERD ................................ 5.4-22

5.4-2 SCCIC Records for Properties on the Project SIte ................................................... 5.4-23

5.4-3 Previous Cultural Resources Studies Within One-Mile of the Project Site ................ 5.4-24

5.5-1 Energy Use During Construction ............................................................................... 5.5-12

5.5-2 Transportation Energy (Gallons/year) ....................................................................... 5.5-14

5.5-3 Energy from Utilities .................................................................................................. 5.5-15

5.6-1 Principal Active Faults ................................................................................................ . 5.6-6

5.6-2 Major Earthquakes ...................................................................................................... 5.6-7

5.7-1 Comparison of Worldwide Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................... 5.7-21

5.7-2 Construction Emissions Modeling Inputs .................................................................. 5.7-35

5.7-3 Estimated Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Construction) .................................... 5.7-36

5.7-4 Operational Emissions Modeling Inputs .................................................................... 5.7-37

5.7-5 CAPCOA Measures .................................................................................................. 5.7-3 8

5.7-6 Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Operational) .................................. 5.7-40

5.8-1 On-Site Hazardous Materials Sites ........................................................................... 5.8-16

5.10-1 Consistency of the Project with the General Plan ................................................... 5.10-14

5.11-1 City of Anaheim Noise Element Land Use Compatibility Matrix .............................. 5.11-11

5.11-2 State of California Interior and Exterior Noise Standards ....................................... 5.11-12

5.11-3 Noise Events by Category ....................................................................................... 5.11-15

5.11-4 Reference Sound Pressure Levels at 50 ft for Construction Equipment Analyzed . 5.11-18

5.11-5 Noise Levels at Sensitive Receiver Locations ........................................................ 5.11-22 DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

vii Table of Contents

5.11-6 Future Traffic Noise Levels with and without the DisneylandForward Project and Acceptability ............................................................................................................ 5.11-25

5.11-7 General Vibration Levels at 25 ft for Construction Equipment Analyzed ................. 5.11-27

5.12-1 City of Anaheim Regional Housing Needs Assessment Targets: 2021–2029 .......... 5.12-4

5.12-2 Employment Summary .............................................................................................. 5.12-7

5.12-3 Population Generation and Housing Demand Calculations ...................................... 5.12-8

5.13-1 City of Anaheim Fire Services Facilities .................................................................. 5.13-16

5.13-2 City of Anaheim Police Station Facilities ................................................................. 5.13-17

5.14-1 VMT Analysis – Criteria 1, Before Mitigation ........................................................... 5.14-37

5.14-2 VMT Analysis – Criteria 2, Before Mitigation ........................................................... 5.14-38

5.14-3 Effectiveness of Transportation Demand Management Measures ......................... 5.14-41

5.14-4 VMT Analysis – Criteria 1, After Mitigation .............................................................. 5.14-44

5.14-5 VMT Analysis – Criteria 2, After Mitigation .............................................................. 5.14-44

5.16-1 Existing Water Demand .......................................................................................... 5.16-23

5.16-2 Constructed Water System Improvements.............................................................. 5.16-24

5.16-3 Constructed Sewer System Improvements ............................................................. 5.16-25

5.16-4 Sewer Flow Factors ................................................................................................ 5.16-39

5.16-5 Sewer Flows for Remaining Approved Disneyland Resort Development Scenario 1 ............................................................................................................... 5.16-40

5.16-6 Sewer Flows for Future Project Development Scenario 2....................................... 5.16-41

5.16-7 Estimated Project Water Demands ......................................................................... 5.16-46

5.16-8 Estimated Project Phasing of Water Demand ......................................................... 5.16-47

5.16-9 2020 UWMP Projected City Water Demand ........................................................... 5.16-48

5.16-10 Estimated Project Phasing of Water Demand ...................................................... 5.16-49 6-1 Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP for Disney Properties ............................... 6-6 6-2 Proposed Development Summary for Disney Properties ............................................... 6-7 6-3 Comparison of the Alternatives to the Proposed Project ............................................. 6-40

EXHIBITS

Exhibit Follows Page

3-1 Regional Location Map .................................................................................................. 3-1 3-2 Local Vicinity and Existing Specific Plan Designations .................................................. 3-1 3-3 Aerial Photograph .......................................................................................................... 3-2 3-4 DRSP and Disney ARSP Properties .............................................................................. 3-2 3-5 Current Development Districts ....................................................................................... 3-2 3-6 Planned Roadway Network ............................................................................................ 3-5 3-7 DRSP C-R Overlay and District A ................................................................................ 3-13 3-8 Proposed DRSP Development Districts and ARSP Overlays ...................................... 3-13 3-9 DRSP Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay .......................................................................... 3-13 3-10 Conceptual Development Scenario – DRSP Southeast District and ARSP Theme Park East Overlay ........................................................................................................ 3-13 3-11 Conceptual Development Scenario – DRSP Theme Park District and ARSP Theme Park West Overlay ........................................................................................... 3-13 3-12 Proposed Abandonment Areas .................................................................................... 3-14 3-13 Vehicular Circulation Plan ............................................................................................ 3-17 3-14 Proposed Pedestrian Circulation .................................................................................. 3-19 3-15 Pedestrian and Vehicular Access Points ..................................................................... 3-19 3-16 Landscape Concept Diagram for The Anaheim Resort Public Realm ......................... 3-22 DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

viii Table of Contents
3-17 Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map (A.M.C. 18.40.080) ............................................................................................... 3-23 4-1 Cumulative Projects ....................................................................................................... 4-7

5.1-1a–c Site Photographs ................................................................................................... 5.1-6

5.1-2 Overview Map ........................................................................................................... 5.1-18

5.1-3 Existing Conditions for the Theme Park District for the Winter Solstice .................... 5.1-18

5.1-4 Proposed Conditions for the Theme Park District for the Winter Solstice ................. 5.1-18

5.1-5 Existing Conditions for the Theme Park District for the Summer Solstice................. 5.1-18

5.1-6 Proposed Conditions for the Theme Park District for the Summer Solstice .............. 5.1-18

5.1-7 Existing Conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District) for the Winter Solstice ............................................................................................... 5.1-19

5.1-8 Proposed Conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District) for the Winter Solstice .................................................................................. 5.1-19

5.1-9 Existing Conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District) for the Summer Solstice ............................................................................................ 5.1-19

5.1-10 Proposed Conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District) for the Summer Solstice ............................................................................... 5.1-19

5.1-11 Existing Conditions for the Parking District (West Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice ...................................................................................................................... 5.1-19

5.1-12 Proposed Conditions for the Parking District (West Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice ...................................................................................................................... 5.1-19

5.1-13 Existing Conditions for the Parking District (West Parking Area) for the Summer Solstice ...................................................................................................................... 5.1-19

5.1-14 Proposed Conditions for the Parking District (West Parking Area) for the Summer Solstice ....................................................................................................... 5.1-19

5.1-15 Existing Conditions for the Parking District (East Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice ...................................................................................................................... 5.1-20

5.1-16 Proposed Conditions for the Parking District (East Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice ...................................................................................................................... 5.1-20

5.1-17 Existing Conditions for the Parking District (East Parking Area) for the Summer Solstice ...................................................................................................................... 5.1-20

5.1-18 Proposed Conditions for the Parking District (East Parking Area) for the Summer Solstice ...................................................................................................................... 5.1-20

5.1-19 Existing Co
nditions for the Southeast District (former Future Expansion District) for the Winter Solstice ............................................................................................... 5.1-20

5.1-20 Proposed Conditions for the Southeast District (former Future Expansion District) for the Winter Solstice ............................................................................................... 5.1-20

5.1-21 Existing Conditions for the Southeast District (former Future Expansion District) for the Summer Solstice ............................................................................................ 5.1-20

5.1-22 Proposed Conditions for the Southeast District (former Future Expansion District) for the Summer Solstice ............................................................................................ 5.1-20

5.1-23 Existing Conditions for the Theme Park West Overlay ( Paradise Pier Hotel) for the Winter Solstice .................................................................................................... 5.1-20

5.1-24 Proposed Conditions for the Theme Park West Overlay (Paradise Pier Hotel) for the Winter Solstice .................................................................................................... 5.1-20

5.1-25 Existing Conditions for the Theme Park West Overlay (Paradise Pier Hotel) for the Summer Solstice ................................................................................................. 5.1-20

5.1-26 Proposed Conditions for the Theme Park West Overlay (Paradise Pier Hotel) for the Summer Solstice ................................................................................................. 5.1-20

5.1-27 Existing Conditions for the Theme Park East Overlay (Toy Story Parking Lot) for the Winter Solstice .................................................................................................... 5.1-21

5.1-28 Proposed Conditions for the Theme Park East Overlay (Toy Story Parking Lot) for the Winter Solstice ............................................................................................... 5.1-21 DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

ix Table of Contents

5.1-29 Existing Conditions for the Theme Park East Overlay (Toy Story Parking Lot) for the Summer Solstice ................................................................................................. 5.1-21

5.1-30 Proposed Conditions for the Theme Park East Overlay (Toy Story Parking Lot) for the Summer Solstice ............................................................................................ 5.1-21

5.1-31 Existing Conditions for the Parking Overlay (MCML) for the Winter Solstice ............ 5.1-21

5.1-32 Proposed Conditions for the Parking Overlay (MCML) for the Winter Solstice ......... 5.1-21

5.1-33 Existing Conditions for the Parking Overlay (MCML) for the Summer Solstice ......... 5.1-21

5.1-34 Proposed Conditions for the Parking Overlay (MCML) for the for the Summer Solstice ...................................................................................................................... 5.1-21

5.1-35 Existing Conditions for the Parking Overlay (HCML) for the Winter Solstice ............ 5.1-21

5.1-36 Proposed Conditions for the Parking Overlay (HCML) for the Winter Solstice ......... 5.1-21

5.1-37 Existing for the Parking Overlay (HCML) for the Summer Solstice ........................... 5.1-21

5.1-38 Proposed Conditions for the Parking Overlay (HCML) for the Summer Solstice ...... 5.1-21

5.2-1 Sensitive Land Uses ................................................................................................. 5.2-15

5.4-1 1530 South Harbor Boulevard, Historic Photos ........................................................ 5.4-17

5.4-2 1900 South Harbor Boulevard, Historic Photos ........................................................ 5.4-18

5.4-3 333 West Ball Road, Historic Photos ........................................................................ 5.4-18

5.4-4 1717 South Disneyland Boulevard ............................................................................ 5.4-18

5.4-5a–c Disneyland Park, Historic Photos ......................................................................... 5.4-19

5.4-6 Potential Disneyland Theme Park Historic District .................................................... 5.4-31

5.6-1 Paleontologic Map ....................................................................................................... 5.6-5

5.11-1 Disneyland Aerial and Model Views .......................................................................... 5.11-9

5.11-2 Noise Level Contours Without Project – Southeast District/Theme Park East Overlay .................................................................................................................... 5.11-10

5.11-3 Noise Level Contours Without Project – Expanded Theme Park District/Theme Park West Overlay .................................................................................................. 5.11-10

5.11-4 Noise Level Contours Without Project – Parking Overlay Northeast Corner of Ball Road and Harbor Boulevard ................................................................................... 5.11-10

5.11-5 Noise Level Contours with Project (West) – Expanded Theme Park District/Theme Park West Overlay .......................................................................... 5.11-21

5.11-6 Noise Level
Contours with Project – Expanded Theme Park District/Theme Park West Overlay ........................................................................................................... 5.11-21

5.11-7 Noise Level Contours with Project – Parking Overlay Northeast Corner of Ball Road and Harbor Boulevard ................................................................................... 5.11-21

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

x Table of Contents

APPENDICES

Appendix

A Notice of Preparation and Comment Letters
B-1 Shade and Shadow Study
B-2 Height Map
C-1 Model Inputs
C-2 CalEEMod Calculations
C-3 Health Risk Assessment
D-1 DisneylandForward Development History Report
D-2 Historic Resources Technical Report
D-3 South Central Coastal Information Center Records
E Energy Calculations
F Paleontological Records Search Results
G Hazardous Materials Database Search
H-1 Master WQMP
H-2 Hydraulics Report
I Noise and Vibration Analysis
J-1 CEQA Transportation Analysis
J-2 Operational Traffic Analysis
K Tribal Consultation Letters
L-1 WSA
L-2 Sewer Study
M DRSP
N ARSP

O TARIP

P TARLIP
Q Plant List

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-1 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
SECTION 1.0

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), California Public Resources Cod e, Sections 21000, et seq ., requires that local government agencies, prior to taking action on projects over which they have discretionary approval authority, consider the environmental consequences of such projects. An Environment al Impact Report (EIR) is a public document designed to provide the lead responsible and interested agencies, special districts, local and State governmental agency decisionmakers, and the public with an analysis of potential environmental consequences to support informed decisionmaking.

This Draft Subsequent EIR has been prepared to identify, analyze, and mitigate, to the extent feasible, the potential environmental effects associated with construction and implementation of the uses allowed by the proposed DisneylandForward (Project). This Draft Subsequent EIR has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of CEQA and the Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines), Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Sections 15000, et seq. The City of Anaheim (City) is the Lead Agency under CEQA and is responsible for preparing the Draft Subsequent EIR. The determination that the City is the “lead agency” is made in accordance with Sections 15051 and 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which define the lead agency as the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project.

A summary description of the DisneylandForward Project (Project) and implementing actions needed are provided in Section 1.3, Project Description Summary, below. A complete description of the Project is provided in Section 3.0, Project Description.

This Draft Subsequent EIR serves as the primary environmental document for all entitlements associated with the Project, including all discretionary approvals requested or required to implement the Project, as further discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description. The Project is being evaluated at a “program level” and, to the extent information is available, a “project level”.

The City has reviewed and revised all submitted drafts, technical studies, and reports, as needed, for consistency with City regulations and policies, and this Draft Subsequent EIR reflects the City’s own independent judgment. Preparation of this Draft Subsequent EIR included reliance on appropriate technical personnel and review of all technical subconsultant reports.

This Executive Summary has been prepared in accordance with Section 15123(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which states that an EIR should contain a brief summary of the proposed actions and its consequences and should identify (1) each significant effect with proposed mitigation measures and alternatives that would reduce or avoid that effect; (2) areas of controversy known to the Lead Agency; and (3) issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives and how to mitigate significant effects.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-2 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING
The Project Site is located entirely within the City of Anaheim in Orange County, California. The City of Garden Grove is located just south of The Anaheim Resort®. The Project Site is located approximately 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and seven miles northwest of Santa Ana, in central Orange County, California, and is generally located adjacent to and southwest of the Interstate 5 (I-5), between Ball Road to the north, Walnut Street to the west, and Chapman Avenue to the south.

The Project site encompasses The Disneyland Resort, including the existing Theme Park, Hotel, Parking and Future Expansion Districts, and the following ARSP properties owned or controlled by Disney or other subsidiaries of The Walt Disney Company in the ARSP Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1): 1515 S. Manchester Avenue (currently used as the Manchester Cast Member Lot); 1585 S. Manchester Avenue (currently an office building and the Manchester Cast Member Lot); 1530 S. Harbor Boulevard (currently used as the Manchester Cast Member Lot); 1900 S. Harbor Boulevard (currently used as the Toy Story Parking Lot); 333 W.

Ball Road (currently used as the Harbor Cast Member Lot); and 1717 S. Disneyland Drive (Paradise Pier Hotel). To the extent the Project would update The Anaheim Resort Public Realm and Landscape Program and Anaheim Resort Identity Program to allow for the use of improved technologies and more drought-tolerant landscaping and would amend the DRSP Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map and the Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map, the Project would cover the entire Anaheim Resort. The Project site also covers areas identified in the General Plan as planned extensions of Gene Autry Way between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street and Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and Orangewood Avenue outside The Anaheim Resort.

Existing land uses within the area governed by the DRSP consist of Disneyland, Downtown Disney, Disney California Adventure Park, Disney’s Grand Californian Hotel & Spa, Disneyland Hotel, Disney administration offices, back-of-house uses, and parking lots/structures owned or controlled by Disney as well as hotels, motels, retail centers, rental car offices, and convenience stores owned by third parties. Existing land us es within the Disney ARSP Properties are surface parking lots, an office building, and the Paradise Pier Hotel and associated parking structure.

Surrounding land uses in the ARSP include the Anaheim Convention Center, as well as hotel, motel, retail, restaurant, service station, office, parking lot/structure, single-family residential, rental car offices, event center/banquet hall, vacant lands, RV park uses, and mobile home sites.

The ARSP also includes a post office, Orange Grove Elementary, and a vocational school.

The areas governed by the DRSP and ARSP are surrounded by a variety of land uses including hotel, motel, retail, restaurant, single-family residential, multi-family residential, and recreational land uses.

The Project site borders Interstate 5 (I-5) and arterial roadways including Harbor Boulevard, Manchester/Clementine Street, Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street, Ball Road, Katella Avenue, and Walnut Street.

The Project site is located within areas governed by the DRSP and ARSP.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-3 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
To allow continued, long-term growth of The Disneyland® Resort, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, U.S., Inc. (Disney), proposes DisneylandForward (Project), which would allow the transfer of uses permitted under The Disneyland Resort Project to other areas of the DRSP and the Disney ARSP Properties (collectively with Disney’s properties in the DRSP, Disney Property or Disney Properties). The areas are or will be considered to be part of The Disneyland Resort Project as modified by the DisneylandForward Project.

The Project would not increase the amount of development square footage or hotel rooms currently allowed in the DRSP and analyzed in Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 311, which the City of Anaheim (City) certified in 1993, or the number of hotel rooms currently allowed in the ARSP and analyzed in Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 340, which the City certified in 2012. However, the Project would permit an increase of 4,376 theme park-related parking spaces in the ARSP. The Project also would provide for future administrative review by the City of Disney’s development projects on Disney Properties, which would rely on this Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report in accordance with CEQA standards.

Since issuance of the Notice of Preparation for this Draft Subsequent EIR, Disney has (1) withdrawn its request for the City to abandon the public right-of-way in Disneyland Drive; (2) proposed a bicycle parking facility in the DRSP East Parking Area and/or ARSP Parking Overlay along Manchester Avenue; and (3) proposed the installation of Class I bike lanes along the east side of Walnut Avenue between Katella Avenue and Ball Road, along the northern side of Disney Way between Anaheim Boulevard and Clementine Street, and along the western side of Clementine Street between Disney Way and the proposed bicycle parking facility in the proposed ARSP Parking Overlay along Manchester Avenue.

Table 1-1 shows the uses that are currently allowed for The Disneyland Resort Project and the ARSP Project.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-4 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-1

USES CURRENTLY ALLOWED UNDER DRSP/ARSP

FOR DISNEY PROPERTIES
Disney DRSP
Property
Maximum Allowable
Development Under DRSP Existing Development1 Remaining Entitlement 1 Hotel District Uses (97 acres)
Hotel Rooms 5,600 hotel rooms 2,342 hotel rooms2 3,258 hotel rooms Hotel Retail/Restaurant 300,0 00 sf 159,549 sf 140,451 sf Hotel Meeting Space 200,000 sf 161,220 sf 38,780 sf
Parking Spaces 9,930 spaces 5,885 spaces 4,045 spaces
Theme Park District (292 acres)
Theme Park 6,850,000 sf 3,192,885 sf3 3,657,115 sf
Administration Building 475,000 sf 305,430 sf 169,570 sf Administration Building
Parking 2,300 spaces 1,545 spaces 755 spaces
Parking District (57.1 acres)
East Parking Area 17,600 spaces 2,179 spaces4 15,421 spaces West Parking Area 16,700 spaces 16,298 spaces 402 spaces Future Expansion District (24.7 acres)
Parking Area 5,100 spaces 2,529 spaces 2,571 spaces
Disney ARSP
Properties
Maximum Allowable
Development Under ARSP Existing Development1 Remaining Entitlement1 C-R District Uses (75.4 acres)
1515 S. Manchester
Ave
1585 S. Manchester
Ave
1530 S. Harbor Blvd
(14.88 acres)
1,116 hotel rooms (75
rooms per gross acre or 75
rooms per lot or parcel,
whichever is greater)
Cast Member parking
(1,261 spaces – temporary
parking lot initially approved
on May 8, 2019, and an
approximately 67,424-
square foot office building
1,116 hotel rooms
1900 S. Harbor Blvd
(44.66 acres)
3,348 hotel rooms (75
rooms per gross acre or 75
rooms per lot or parcel,
whichever is greater)
5 Toy Story Parking Lot
(4,635 spaces-temporary
parking lot approved
through June 26, 2024)
3,348 hotel rooms
333 W. Ball Road
(10.69 acres)
534 hotel rooms (50 rooms
per gross acre or 75 rooms
per lot or parcel, whichever
is greater)
Cast Member parking
(1,324 spaces) 534 hotel rooms
1717 S. Disneyland
Drive
(5.15 acres)
564 hotel rooms (50 rooms
per gross acre or 75 rooms
per lot or parcel, whichever
is greater)
6 Paradise Pier Hotel (489
rooms and approximately
17,619 square feet in
ancillary commercial uses)
45 hotel rooms
1 These numbers are as of the date of the Notice of Preparation, October 21, 2021; over the course of this environmental review process, these numbers may change due to ongoing development efforts based on current entitlements. 2 Hotel rooms include existing Vacation Owne rship Resort (VOR) units at the Grand Californian Hotel and VOR units at the Disneyland Hotel under construction as of NOP.
3 This amount includes the existing 246,702 sf of retail, dining and entertainment in Downtown Disney as of the NOP. The DRSP allows up to 350,000 sf of retail, dining and entertainment sf in either the Theme Park or Hotel District. 4 This amount includes the existing 842 s paces in the Ball Cast Member Lot. The DRSP allows up to 5,000 parking spaces identified for the East Parking Area to be located in the Theme Park District. 5 Acreage for density excludes ulti mate public right-of-way for Clementine Street and Gene Autry Way. 6 The Paradise Pier Hotel property is comprised of two parce ls: a 4.48-acre parcel that includes 489 hotel rooms and a 0.67- acre property that is allowed 75 hotel rooms.

Source: City of Anaheim 2021.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-5 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
The Project proposes to modify the limits of the existing Theme Park and Hotel District boundaries within the existing DRSP perimeter, rename Districts within the DRSP, and establish Overlays for Disney’s ARSP Properties. The Project’s proposed densities for Disney Properties are shown in Table 1-2 for the updated DRSP and ARSP areas.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-6 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-2

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY FOR DISNEY PROPERTIES
Disney DRSP Property Maximum Allowable Development Under DRSP Theme Park District – 389 acres
Hotel Rooms Up to 5,600 hotel rooms3
Hotel Retail/Restaurant Up to 300,000 sf
Hotel Meeting Space Up to 200,000 sf
Parking for Hotel Uses Up to 9,930 spaces
Theme Park District Retail Entertainment Up to 350,000 sf1 Theme Park and Back-of-house Uses Up to 6,850,000 sf1,5 Administration Building 475,000 sf
Administration Building Parking 2,300 spaces
Theme Park Parking 5,000 spaces2
Parking District – 57.1 acres
East Parking Area (30.1 acres) Up to 17,600 spaces2
West Parking Area (27 acres) Up to 16,700 spaces
Southeast District – 24.7 acres
Theme Park Up to 390,000 sf5
Hotel Rooms Up to 1,852 hotel rooms3
Parking 5,100 spaces
Total Maximum Allowable Development
7,825,000 sf
5,600 rooms
51,630 spaces
Disney ARSP Properties8 Maximum Allowable Development Under ARSP Parking Overlay4 – 25.57 acres
1515 S. Manchester Ave
1585 S. Manchester Ave
1530 S. Harbor Blvd
A portion of the parking spaces allocated to the East Parking Area of the DRSP and up to 1,116 hotel rooms
333 W. Ball Road Up to 5,700 parking spaces and up to 534 hotel rooms6 Theme Park East Overlay – 52.6 acres7
1900 S. Harbor Blvd Up to 840,000 sf of theme park uses and up to 3,348 hotel rooms5 Theme Park West Overlay – 5.15 acres
1717 S. Disneyland Drive Up to 80,000 sf of theme park uses and up 564 hotel rooms5 Notes:
1 Up to 350,000 sf of the theme park and back-of-house sf may be developed as Retail, Dining and Entertainment sf. 2 Up to 5,000 parking spaces may be constructed within the Theme Park District; however, an equivalent number of potential parking spaces would be removed from the allotment for the East Parking Area. 3 Up to 1,852 hotel rooms may be constructed in the Southeast District; however, an equivalent number of potential hotel rooms would be removed from the allotment for the Theme Park District, such that the maximum number of hotel rooms would not exceed 5,600.
4 For any square footage for back-of-house uses or limited retail, dining and entertainment uses, the traffic generation characteristics of said uses shall not exceed those associated with the otherwise permitted hotel/motel (including accessory uses) density as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to approval of building plans. Further, the proposed development shall not result in infrastructure impacts greater than those associated with the property's permitted hotel/motel density, unless such impacts are duly analyzed and mitigated pursuant to subsequent environmental review (such impacts shall be determined through a sewer and traffic impact analysis to be submitted to the City Engineer).

Additional infrastructure studies may be required as determined by the Planning Director. 5 Theme park sf may be constructed in the Southeast Distri ct, the Theme Park East Overlay and the Theme Park West Overlay; however, an equivalent number of potential theme park sf would be removed from the allotment for the Theme Park District, such that the maximum theme park sf would not exceed 6,850,000 sf. The amount of restaurant sf in the Southeast District and the Theme Park East Overlay shall be further limited to up to 20 percent of the allotted theme park square footage in the District/Overlay.
6 Up to 5,700 parking spaces includes the number of existing spaces (1,324 spaces) plus additional spaces (4,376 spaces).

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-7 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-2

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY FOR DISNEY PROPERTIES
Disney DRSP Property Maximum Allowable Development Under DRSP 7 The planned extensions of Clementine St reet and Gene Autry Way are proposed to be removed as part of the Project; therefore, the total acreage for the Theme Park East Overlay has been adjusted to include the acreages associated with these street rights-of-way; however, the maximum intensity of up to 3,348 hotel rooms would not change. 8 Actual acres for hotel density to be determined by a licensed Civil Engineer/Land Surveyor.

Source: WDI 2021.

Within The Disneyland Resort, the Project proposes to reallocate allowable land uses within the Theme Park District (389 acres), the Parking District (57.1 acres), and the Southeast District (24.7 acres). The former Hotel District would become part of the Theme Park District and the Future Expansion District would become the Sout heast District. The Project would allow Disney to move a portion of the unused approved theme park square footage to the existing Hotel District, which would become part of the new expanded Theme Park District of the DRSP. The Project also would allow Disney to move a portion of the unused approved theme park square footage to the existing Future Expansion District, which would become the Southeast District of the DRSP, and to the proposed Theme Park East and West Overlays of the ARSP.

Under the Project, Disney could develop cumulatively up to 6,850,000 previously approved square feet of theme park uses in the DRSP, including up to 6,850,000 previously approved square feet in the expanded Theme Park District if all theme park square footage were developed in the expanded Theme Park District. Disney coul d also develop a portion of this previously approved theme park square footage in the newly renamed Southeast District (up to 390,000 square feet), in the proposed Theme Park East Overlay (up to 840,000 square feet), and in the proposed Theme Park West Overlay (up to 80,000 square feet). If theme park square footage is developed in the Southeast District and Theme Park East and West Overlays, an equivalent amount of theme park square footage would be removed from the allotment for the Theme Park District, such that the maximum theme park square footage would not exceed 6,850,000 square feet.

Similarly, the Project would allow Disney to move the unused portion of the hotel room approvals from the existing Hotel District to the existing Theme Park District or the existing Future Expansion District, the newly renamed Southeast District. Under the Project, Disney could develop cumulatively up to 5,600 previously approved hotel rooms in the DRSP, including a combination of up to 5,600 previously approved hotel rooms in the expanded Theme Park District if all hotel rooms were developed in the expanded Theme Park District and up to 1,852 previously approved hotel rooms in the newly renamed Southeast District.

Disney is not seeking additional square footage for theme park uses or retail entertainment uses or additional hotel rooms within The Disneyland Resort as part of this Project. Instead, the Project would allow Disney to move the existing approvals to other areas governed by the DRSP and ARSP.

Within the ARSP, the Project would create a Theme Park East Overlay within the ARSP for the existing Toy Story Parking Lot and a Theme Park West Overlay within the ARSP for the existing Paradise Pier Hotel.

1-8 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
feet of previously approved theme park uses wi thin the Theme Park East Overlay and up to 80,000 square feet of previously approved theme park uses within the Theme Park West Overlay for a cumulative total of up to 920,000 square feet of previously approved theme park uses in these Overlays. The Anaheim Municipal Code currently allows theme park uses in these Overlay areas with approval of a conditional use permit.

The Project would create a Parking Overlay within the ARSP for the Disney ARSP Properties located at 1515 S. Manchester Avenue, 1585 S. Manchester Avenue, 1530 S. Harbor Boulevard, and 333 W. Ball Road. The Project would increase the number of permitted theme park parking spaces in the Parking Overlay at 333 W. Ball Road, permitting up to 5,700 parking spaces (this includes 1,324 existing spaces plus 4,376 additional spaces). The Parking Overlay would permit development of the same type of parking and transportation facilities allowed under Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.114.080 for the East Parking Area of the DRSP Parking District, and the same type of back-of-house uses, limited retail, and dining and entertainment uses allowed under Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.114.060 for the Theme Park District of the DRSP.

Parking facilities in the Parking Overlay would be architecturally treated through use of terraced structures; landscaped buffers and berms; noise attenuation louvers along the openings on the lower levels and solid walls with landscaped planters on the upper levels; and additional landscaping in the setbacks.

Disney could also develop hotel rooms in these Overlays as permitted by the existing ARSP.

Approval of the proposed project would require amendments to the City of Anaheim General Plan, DRSP, ARSP, Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program, Anaheim Resort Identity Program and Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map.

No changes are proposed to District A, or the Anaheim GardenWalk, or C-R Overlays, of the DRSP or HCSP.

1.4 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, CEQA requires an evaluation of the comparative effects of a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project that would feasibly attain most of the Project’s basic objectives and would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of the Project. A feasible alternative is one that can be accomplished successfully in a reasonable period of time, taking economic, legal, social, and technological factors into consideration. The range of alternatives is governed by the “rule of reason” that requires the Draft Subsequent EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasonable choice.

Section 6.0, Alternatives, of this Draft Subsequent EIR, addresses alternatives to reduce the Project’s potential impacts that have been identified as significant and unavoidable. Specifically, these include impacts resulting from the Project related to cultural resources and noise. As discussed in Section 6.0, Alternatives, the Project also would continue to result in significant and unavoidable air quality and greenhouse gas impacts as with the underlying Disneyland Resort Project and the ARSP Project. Section 6.0, Alternatives, provides descriptions of each alternative, a comparative analysis of the potential environmental effects of each alternative to those associated with the Project, and a discussion of each alternative’s ability to meet the Project objectives. The following is a summary description of the alternatives evaluated in this Draft Subsequent EIR.
 No-Project/Continuing Development;
 Restrict Removal or Substantial Changes to Listed Historic Features; and  Development With No Theme Park East Overlay.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-9 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
As required by CEQA, Section 6.0, Alternatives, also identifies alternatives considered but eliminated from the detailed analysis and the envir onmentally superior alternative. Alternatives that were considered and eliminated from deta iled analysis include: No Project/No Further Development and Alternative Site.

1.5 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY/ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(b)(3) requires that a Draft Subsequent EIR contain issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate significant impacts. With respect to the Project, the major issues to be resolved by the City, as the Lead Agency, include the following:
 Whether this environmental document adequatel y describes the environmental impacts of the Project;
 Whether the recommended mitigation measures and Project design features should be modified and/or adopted;
 Whether the benefits of the Project override its significant adverse impacts, including impacts that cannot be mitigated to a level below significance after adoption of feasible mitigation measures;
 Whether there are other mitigation measures that should be applied to the Project besides those identified in the Draft Subsequent EIR; and
 Whether there are any alternatives to the Project that would substantially lessen any of its significant impacts while achieving most of the basic project objectives.

State CEQA Guidelines Section 15123(b)(2) indicates that a Draft Subsequent EIR summary should identify areas of controversy known to the Lead Agency, including issues raised by agencies and the public. This Draft Subsequent EIR has taken into consideration the comments received from the public and various agencies in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of this Draft Subsequent EIR and through the scoping process. Written comments received during the NOP and scoping period are contained in Appendix A. Environmental issues that have been raised during opportunities for public input regarding the scope of the Draft Subsequent EIR are summarized in Section 2.8, Notice of Preparation and Initial Study, of this Draft Subsequent EIR and are addressed in each relevant environmental issue area analyzed in Sections 5.1 through

5.16 of this Draft Subsequent EIR.

During the NOP public review period, the City received a consultation request pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 52 from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The consultation process is addressed in Section 5.15, Tribal Cultural Resources.

The primary areas of controversy currently known to the City that have been raised to date related to the implementation of the DisneylandForward Project are related to aesthetics and visual impacts (addressed in Section 5.1, Aesthetics), air quality (addressed in Section 5.2, Air Quality), cultural resources (addressed in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources), greenhouse gas emissions (addressed in Section 5.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions), hazardous materials (addressed in Section 5.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials), land use (addressed in Section 5.10, Land Use and Planning), noise (addressed in Section 5.11, Noise), public services (addressed in Section

5.13, Public Services), traffic impacts (addres sed in Section 5.14, Transportation), and tribal cultural resources (addressed in Section 5.15, Tribal Cultural Resources).

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-10 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

1.6 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMEN TAL EFFECTS, MITIGATION MEASURES,

AND LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15126.2 and 15126.4, a Draft Subsequent EIR is required to identify any potentially significant adverse impacts and recommend mitigation that would eliminate or reduce these impacts to levels of less than significant. At the onset of the CEQA process, the City prepared an Initial Study (refer to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060 and 15081). It was determined that, with the exception of agricultural (farmland) and forestry resources, mineral resources, recreation, and wildfire, implementation of the Project could have potentially significant impacts for each of the remaining topical environmental issues identified in the environmental checklist included in Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines. This Draft Subsequent EIR focuses on those remaining environmental impact resource areas that are identified in the environmental checklist included in Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines.

The scope of the Draft Subsequent EIR was further determined based upon comments received in response to the NOP and comments received at the public scoping meeting held by the City.

Based on the determination by the City and input received during the scoping process, the environmental issue areas identified for study in this Draft Subsequent EIR are:
 Aesthetics
 Air Quality
 Biological Resources
 Cultural Resources
 Energy
 Geology and Soils
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
 Hydrology and Water Quality
 Land Use and Planning
 Noise
 Population and Housing
 Public Services
 Transportation
 Tribal Cultural Resources
 Utilities and Service Systems

Sections 5.1 through 5.16 of this Draft Subsequent EIR provide the required environmental analysis for these topical issues. Table 1-3 presents a summary of the thresholds analyzed; findings regarding each environmental impact in EIR No. 311, which the City certified in 1993 prior to approving The Disneyland Resort Project, and in Supplemental EIR No. 340, which the City certified in 2012 prior to approving an amendment to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project, as the Project modifies both prior proj ects; the environmental impacts of the Project; Standard Requirements (SRs), Mitigation Measures (MMs), and Project Design Features (PDFs) that reduce any potentially significant impacts; and the level of significance of each impact after mitigation. Following Table 1-3 is the complete text of all SRs, MMs, and PDFs by environmental topic. Significant irreversible environmental changes and growth-inducing impacts are addressed in Section 7.0, Other CEQA Considerations.

If the City, as Lead Agency, determines that unavoidable significant adverse impacts will result from the Project, the City must prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations before it can approve the Project. A Statement of Overriding Considerations states that the decisionmaking body has balanced the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable significant environmental effects and has determined that the benefits of the Project outweigh the adverse effects and, therefore, the adverse effects are considered to be acceptable. Based on the analysis presented in the Draft Subsequent EIR, implementation of the Project would result in significant unavoidable impacts related to air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise. A Statement of Overriding Considerations would be required for the DisneylandForward Project.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Environmental Documentation\PR_SEIR\1.0_Executive_Summary-090823.docx 1-11 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

If the project is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
Construction:

Significant and
Unavoidable
Construction:

Not addressed
Construction:

Potentially significant

MM AES-5 Construction:

Less than significant
Construction:

EIR No. 311: Reduced

SEIR No. 340: New
Operation:

Significant and
Unavoidable
Operation:

Potentially significant
MM AES-1, MM AES-4 through MM AES-18, MM LU-3

Operation:

Less than significant

Operation:

EIR No. 311: Reduced

SEIR No. 340: Reduced
Threshold 5.1d: Would the project create a new
source of substantial li ght or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Not Addressed Not Addressed Potentially Significant MM AES-2, MM AES-3, MM AES-19 Less than Significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: New
Cumulative Impact Significant and
Unavoidable
No Cumulative
Impact
Potentially significant MM AES-1 through MM AES-19, MM LU-3 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Reduced

SEIR No. 340: Reduced
Section 5.2 – Air Quality
Threshold 5.2a: Would the project conflict with or
obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
plan?
Less than
significant with
mitigation
Significant and
unavoidable
Potentially significant MM AQ-3, MM AQ-4, MM AQ-9, MM AQ-11 and PDF AQ-1 through PDF AQ-4
Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Reduced
Threshold 5.2b : Would the project result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is in non-
attainment under an app licable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
Regional
Construction
Emissions:

Significant and
unavoidable
Regional
Construction
Emissions:

Significant and
unavoidable
Regional Construction
Emissions:

Potentially significant
Regional Construction Emissions:

SR AQ-1, SR AQ-2, MM AQ-1 throu gh MM AQ-11, MM AQ-13, MM ENE-1, MM TRA-8 and MM TRA-9
Regional Construction
Emissions:

Significant and unavoidable
Regional Construction
Emissions:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Localized
Construction Phase
Emissions:

Not Addressed
Localized
Construction Phase
Emissions:

Significant and
unavoidable
Localized
Construction Phase
Emissions:

Potentially significant
Localized Construction Phase Emissions:

MM AQ-14
Localized Construction Phase
Emissions:

Less than significant
Localized Construction
Phase Emissions:

EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Reduced
Operation:

Significant and
unavoidable
Operation:

Potentially significant
Operation:

MM AQ-1 through MM AQ-4, MM AQ-6, MM AQ-9 through MM AQ-10, MM AQ-14, MM ENE-1 through MM ENE-5, SR ENE-1 through SR ENE-3, PDF ENE-1, MM HWQ-2 through MM HWQ-7, PDF POP-1, MM TRA-8, MM TRA- 9, MM TRA-15, MM TRA-16, MM TRA-19, MM UTIL-1, MM UTIL-14, MM UTIL-17, MM UTIL-18, MM UTIL-20, MM UTIL-21
Operation:

Significant and unavoidable
Operation:

EIR No. 311: New for PM 10
and PM 2.5

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.2c: Would the project expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less than
significant with
mitigation
Less than significant
with mitigation
Potentially significant MM AQ-14 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.2d: Would the project result in other
emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of people?
Not Addressed Less than significant Less than significant No mitigation is required. Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-12 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

Significant and
unavoidable
Criteria Pollutant
Concentrations
During Construction
and Operations:

Potentially significant
Criteria Pollutant Concentrations During Construction and Operations:

MM AQ-1 through MM AQ-11, MM AQ-13, MM AQ-14, MM ENE-1 through MM ENE-5, SR ENE-1 through SR ENE-3, PDF ENE-1, MM HWQ-2 through MM HWQ-7, PDF POP-1, MM TRA-8, MM TRA-9, MM TRA-15, MM TRA-16, MM TRA-19, MM UTIL-1, MM UTIL-14, MM UTIL-17, MM UTIL-18, MM UTIL- 20, MM UTIL-21
Criteria Pollutant Concentrations
During Construction and
Operations:

Significant and unavoidable
Criteria Pollutant
Concentrations During
Construction and
Operations:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
CO Hotspots and
TACs:

No Cumulative
Impact /Not
Addressed
CO Hotspots and
TACs:

Potentially significant

CO Hotspots and TACs:

No mitigation is required.

CO Hotspots and TACs:

Less than significant

CO Hotspots and TACs:

EIR No. 311: Consistent/New

SEIR No. 340:

Consistent/New
Odors:

No Cumulative
Impact
Odors:

Less than significant
Odors:

No mitigation is required.

Odors:

Less than significant
Odors:

EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Section 5.3 – Biological Resources
Threshold 5.3d: Would the project interfere
substantially with the mo vement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resid ent or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially Significant MM BIO-1, MM B IO-2 Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts Not Addressed No Cumulative
Impact
Less than significant No mitigation is required. Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Section 5.4 – Cultural Resources
Threshold 5.4a: Would the project cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?
No Impact Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially significant MM CULT-2, MM CULT-3, MM CULT- 4 Significant and Unavoidable EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: New
Threshold 5.4b: Would the project cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section
15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially significant MM CULT-1, MM TCR-1, SR CUL -1 Less than significant. EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts Historic Resources:

No Cumulative
Impact
Historic Resources:

Potentially significant

MM CUL-2 through MM CUL-4 Historic: Significant and
Unavoidable

EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: New
Archaeological
Resources:

No Cumulative
Impact
Archaeological
Resources:

Potentially significant
MM CUL-1 and MM TCR-1 Archaeological Resources: Less
than significant
EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-13 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

SEIR No. 340: New
Threshold 5.5b: Would the project conflict with or
obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
Not Addressed Not Addressed Potentially Significant MM ENE- 1, MM TRA-8 and MM TRA-9 Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: New
Cumulative Impacts Not Addressed Not Addressed Potentially Significant MM AQ -10, MM AQ-11, MM ENE-1 through MM ENE-5, MM TRA-8, MM TRA-9, and MM UTIL-16
Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: New
Section 5.6 – Geology and Soils
Threshold 5.6a: Would the project directly or
indirectly cause 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?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially significant MM GEO-1 through MM GEO-5, SR GEO- 1, MM PS-10 Less than signific ant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent

Threshold 5.6b: Would the project result in
substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially significant SR HWQ-1 and SR HWQ-2, MM GEO-6 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.6d: Would the project be located on
expansive soils, as defined in Section 1803.5.3 of the
California Building Code (2010), creating substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property?
Not Addressed Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially significant MM GEO-1 through MM GEO-6 Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.6f: Would the project directly or
indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially significant MM GEO-7

Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts No Cumulative
Impact
No Cumulative
Impact
Potentially significant MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-7 Le ss than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Section 5.7 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold 5.7a: Would the project generate
greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
Not Addressed Significant and
Unavoidable
Potentially Significant MM AQ-1 through MM AQ -4, MM AQ-6, MM AQ-9 through MM AQ-10, MM AQ-14, MM ENE-1 through MM ENE-5, SR ENE-1 through SR ENE-3, PDF ENE-1, MM HWQ-2 through MM HWQ-7, PDF POP-1, MM TRA-8, MM TRA- 9, MM TRA-15, MM TRA-16, MM TRA-19, MM UTIL-1, MM UTIL-14, MM UTIL-17, MM UTIL-18, MM UTIL-20, MM UTIL-21
Significant and Unavoidable EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-14 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts Not Addressed Significant and
Unavoidable
Potentially Significant MM AQ-1 through MM AQ- 11, MM AQ-13, MM AQ-14, MM ENE-1 through MM ENE-5, SR ENE-1 through SR ENE-3, PDF ENE-1, MM HWQ-2 through MM HWQ-7, PDF POP-1, MM TRA-8, MM TRA-9, MM TRA-15, MM TRA-16, MM TRA-19, MM UTIL-1, MM UTIL-14, MM UTIL-17, MM UTIL-18, MM UTIL- 20, MM UTIL-21
Significant and Unavoidable EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Section 5.8 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Threshold 5.8a: Would the project create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than significant Potentially significant SR HAZ-1 through SR HAZ-4. MM HAZ-2, MM HAZ-5 through MM HAZ-7 Less than signific ant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Increased
Threshold 5.8b Would the project create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving t he release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than significant Potentially significant MM HAZ-1 through MM HAZ-7, SR HAZ-1 through SR HAZ-4 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Increased
Threshold 5.8d: Would the project 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?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially significant MM HAZ-3 through MM HAZ-7 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts No Cumulative
Impact
No Cumulative
Impact
Potentially significant MM HAZ-1 through MM HAZ-7 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Section 5.9 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Threshold 5.9a: Would the project violate any water
quality standards or wast e discharge requirements
or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially Significant SR HWQ-1, SR HWQ-2, SR HWQ-4 and SR HWQ-5, MM HWQ-1 through MM HWQ-6, MM HWQ-8
Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.9b: Would the project substantially
decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundw ater recharge such that
the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially Significant SR HWQ-2 and MM HWQ-7 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.9c: Would the project substantially alter
the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:
(i) result in substantial er osion or siltation on- or
off-site?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially Significant SR HWQ-1 and SR HWQ-2, MM HWQ-2, MM HWQ-4, MM HWQ-5, and MM HWQ-8, MM GEO-6
Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-15 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

AND LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Thresholds of Significance
EIR No. 311
Finding
SEIR No. 340
Finding
DisneylandForward
Impacts Prior to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures [MMs]/ Project Design Features (PDFs)/Standard Requirements (SRs)
Level of Significance
After Mitigation
New or Substantially More
Severe Impact?
Threshold 5.9c: Would the project substantially alter
the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:
(ii) substantially increas e the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or offsite?
(iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially Significant SR HWQ-1 through SR HWQ-4, MM HWQ-1 and MM HWQ-9 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.9e: Would the project conflict with or
obstruct implementation of a water quality control
plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially Significant SR HWQ-1, MM HWQ-3 and MM HWQ-6 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts No Cumulative
Impact
No Cumulative
Impact
Potentially Significant SR HWQ-1 through SR HWQ-4, MM HWQ-1 through MM HWQ-9, MM GEO- 6 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Section 5.10 – Land Use and Planning
Threshold 5.10a: Would the project physically
divide an established community?
Not Addressed Less than significant Less than significant No mitigation is required Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.10b: Would the project cause a
significant environmental impact due to a conflict
with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Significant and
Unavoidable
Less than significant Potentially significant MM LU-1 through MM LU-3 and PDF LU-1 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Reduced

SEIR No. 340: New
Cumulative Impacts Significant and
Unavoidable
No Cumulative
Impact
Potentially significant MM LU-1 through MM LU-3 and PDF LU-1 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Reduced

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Section 5.11 – Noise
Threshold 5.11a: Would the project result in
generation of a s ubstantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Construction:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Construction:

Significant and
Unavoidable
Construction:

Potentially significant
MM NOI-8 through MM NOI-14, MM NOI-17 through MM NOI-19, SR NOI-1, MM TRA-13

Construction:

Significant and unavoidable
Construction:

EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Operation:

Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Operation:

Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Operation:

Potentially significant
MM NOI-1 through MM NOI-3, MM NOI- 6, MM NOI-7, MM NOI-16, MM NOI- 15, MM NOI-20 through MM NOI-24
Operation: Less than significant Operation:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.11b: Would the project generate
excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
Not Addressed Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Potentially significant MM NOI-14, MM NOI-13, MM NOI-19

Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-16 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

No Cumulative
Impact
Construction:

Significant and
Unavoidable
Potentially significant MM NOI-8 through MM NOI-14, MM NOI-17 through MM NOI-19, SR NOI-1, MM TRA-13
Construction:

Significant and Unavoidable
Construction:

EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Operation:

No Cumulative
Impact
Operation:

No Cumulative
Impact
Potentially significant MM NOI-1 through MM NOI-3, MM NOI- 6, MM NOI-7, MM NOI-16, MM NOI-15, MM NOI-20 through MM NOI-24
Operation:

Less than significant
Operation:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Vibration:

Not Addressed
Vibration
No Cumulative
Impact
Potentially significant MM NOI-14, MM NOI-13, MM NOI-19

Vibration:

Less than Significant
Vibration:

EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Section 5.12 – Population and Housing
Threshold 5.12a: Would the project induce
substantial unplanned 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)?
Less than
significant
Less than significant Less than significant PDF POP- 1 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts No Cumulative
Impact
No Cumulative
Impact
Less than significant No mitigation is required Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Section 5.13 – Public Services and Recreation
Threshold 5.13a(i): Would the proposed project
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered government facilities, need for new or
physically altered government facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for fire protection?
Less than
significant with
mitigation
Less than significant
with mitigation
Potentially significant MM PS-1 through MM PS-15, MM HAZ-2 through MM HAZ-6, MM NOI-1, MM UTIL-3, and PDF PS-1
Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.13(ii): Would the proposed project
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered government facilities, need for new or
physically altered government facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for police protection?
Less than
significant with
mitigation
Less than significant
with mitigation
Potentially significant MM PS-16 through MM PS-25, PDF PS-2 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-17 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

AND LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Thresholds of Significance
EIR No. 311
Finding
SEIR No. 340
Finding
DisneylandForward
Impacts Prior to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures [MMs]/ Project Design Features (PDFs)/Standard Requirements (SRs)
Level of Significance
After Mitigation
New or Substantially More
Severe Impact?
Threshold 5.13(iii): Would the proposed project
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered government facilities, need for new or
physically altered government facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for schools?
Significant and
Unavoidable
Less than significant
with mitigation
Potentially significant MM PS-26, PDF PS-3 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Reduced

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.13(iv): Would the proposed project
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered government facilities, need for new or
physically altered government facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for parks?
Less than significant Less than significant Less than significant PDF PS-4 and PDF PS-5 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.13(v): Would the proposed project
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered government facilities, need for new or
physically altered government facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for other public facilities?
Not Addressed Less than significant
with mitigation
Potentially significant MM PS-27 Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts Fire Protection:

No Cumulative
Impact
Fire Protection:

Potentially significant
Fire Protection:

MM PS-1 through MM PS-15, MM HAZ-2 through MM HAZ-6, MM NOI-1, MM UTIL-3, and PDF PS-1
Fire Protection:

Less than significant
Fire Protection:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Police Protection:

No Cumulative
Impact
Police Protection:

Potentially significant

Police Protection:

MM PS-16 through MM PS-25, PDF PS-2

Police Protection:

Less than significant

Police Protection:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Schools:

Significant and
unavoidable

Schools:

No Cumulative
Impact
Schools:

Potentially significant

Schools:

MM PS-26, PDF PS-3

Schools:

Less than significant

Schools:

EIR No. 311: Reduced

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Parks:

No Cumulative
Impact
Parks:

Less than significant

Parks:

PDF PS-4 and PDF PS-5

Parks:

Less than significant

Parks:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Libraries:

Not addressed
Libraries:

No Cumulative
Impact
Libraries:

Potentially significant
Libraries:

MM PS-27
Libraries:

Less than significant
Libraries:

EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-18 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

SEIR No. 340: Reduced
Threshold 5.14b: Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
Not addressed Not addressed Potentially significant MM TRA-3 and MM TRA-6 through MM TRA-9 Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: New
Threshold 5.14c: Would the project substantially
increase hazards due to a geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses?
Not addressed Less than significant Potentially significant MMsTRA-4, MM TRA-5, MM TRA-12 through MM TRA-14, MM TRA-16 through MM TRA-22
Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.14d: Would the project result in
inadequate emergency access?
Not addressed Less than significant Potentially significant MM TRA-10 and MM PS-3, MM PS-4, MM PS-6, MM PS-7, MM PS-9, MM PS-11, MM PS-12, MM PS-19, MM PS-20, MM PS-22, and MM PS-23 Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts No Cumulative
Impact
Significant and
unavoidable, but
different threshold
Potentially significant MM TRA-1 through MM TRA-22, MM PS-3, MM PS-4, MM PS-6, MM PS-7, MM PS-9, MM PS-11, MM PS-12, MM PS-19, MM PS-20, MM PS-22, and MM PS-23
Less than significant EIR No. 311: New (due to
VMT Analysis)

SEIR No. 340: New (due to
VMT Analysis)
Section 5.15 – Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold 5.15a: Would the project cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in
terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California R egister of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public Resources Code
section 5020.1(k)?
Not addressed Not addressed No impact No mitigation is required. No impact EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: New
Threshold 5.15b : Would the project cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in
terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is a resource
determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial ev idence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying
the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
Not addressed Not addressed Potentially significant MM TCR-1, MM CUL-1, and SR CUL-1 Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: New
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-19 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

SEIR No. 340: New
Section 5.16 – Utilities and Service Systems
Threshold 5.16-1: Would the project require or
result in the construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications
facilities, the construction or relocation of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
Water:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Water:

Less than significant
with mitigation
Water:

Potentially significant
Water:

MM UTIL-1 through MM UTIL-7 and MM HWQ-2
Water:

Less than significant
Water:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Wastewater:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Wastewater:

Less than significant
with mitigation
Wastewater:

Potentially significant
Wastewater:

MM UTIL-8 through MM UTIL-11
Wastewater:

Less than significant
Wastewater:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Stormwater:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Stormwater:

Less than significant
with mitigation
Stormwater:

Potentially significant
Stormwater:

SR HWQ-1 through SR HWQ-4, MM UTIL-12 and MM UTIL-13
Stormwater:

Less than significant
Stormwater:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Electricity:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Electricity:

Less than significant
with mitigation
Electricity:

Potentially significant
Electricity:

MM UTIL-14, MM UTIL-15, MM UTIL-26 and MM ENE-2
Electricity:

Less than significant
Electricity:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Natural Gas:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Natural Gas:

No impact
Natural Gas:

Potentially significant
Natural Gas:

MM ENE-1 and MM ENE-3
Natural Gas:

Less than significant
Natural Gas:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: New
Telecommunication:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Telecommunication:

No impact
Telecommunication:

Potentially significant
Telecommunication:

MM UTIL-22
Telecommunication:

Less than significant
SEIR No.

Telecommunication:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

340: New
Threshold 5.16-2: Would the project have sufficient
water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during
normal, dry, and multiple dry years (including large-
scale developments as defined by Public Resources
Code Section 21151.9 and described in Question
No. 20 of the Environmental Information Form)?
Less than
significant with
mitigation
Less than significant
with mitigation
Potentially significant MM UTIL-1 through MM UTIL-6 and SR UTIL-1 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.16-3: Would the project result in a
determination by the wastew ater 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?
Less than significant Less than significant
with mitigation
Potentially significant MM UTIL-8, MM UTIL-11 and SR UTIL-2 through SR UTIL-4 Less than significant EIR No. 311: New

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-20 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
TABLE 1-3

SUMMARY OF THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, PROJECT IMPACTS, MITIGATION,

AND LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Thresholds of Significance
EIR No. 311
Finding
SEIR No. 340
Finding
DisneylandForward
Impacts Prior to
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures [MMs]/ Project Design Features (PDFs)/Standard Requirements (SRs)
Level of Significance
After Mitigation
New or Substantially More
Severe Impact?
Threshold 5.16-4: Would the project generate solid
waste in excess of State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the atta inment of solid waste
reduction goal?
Significant and
unavoidable
Less than significant
with mitigation
Potentially significant MM UTIL-17 through MM UTIL-20 and MM UTIL-22 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Reduced SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Threshold 5.16-5: Would the project comply with
Federal, State, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Significant and
unavoidable
Less than significant
with mitigation
Potentially significant MM UTIL-17 through MM UTIL -21 Less than significant EIR No. 311: Reduced SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Cumulative Impacts Water:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Water:

Less than significant
with mitigation
Water:

Potentially significant
Water:

MM UTIL-1 through MM UTIL-7
MM HWQ-2
Water:

Less than significant
Water:

EIR No. 311: Consistent
SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Wastewater:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Wastewater:

Less than significant
with mitigation
Wastewater:

Potentially significant
Wastewater:

MM UTIL-8 through MM UTIL-11
Wastewater:

Less than significant

Wastewater:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Stormwater:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Stormwater:

Significant and
unavoidable
Stormwater:

Potentially significant
Stormwater:

SR HWQ-1 through SR HWQ-4
MM UTIL-12 and MM UTIL-13
Stormwater:

Less than significant
Stormwater:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Reduced
Electricity:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Electricity:

Less than significant
with mitigation
Electricity:

Potentially significant
Electricity:

MM UTIL-14, MM UTIL-15, MM UTIL-26 and MM ENE-2

Electricity:

Less than significant
Electricity:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Natural Gas:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Natural Gas:

No impact
Natural Gas:

Potentially significant
Natural Gas:

MM ENE-1 and MM ENE-3

Natural Gas:

Less than significant
Natural Gas:

EIR No. 311: Consistent
SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Solid Waste:

Significant and
unavoidable
Solid Waste:

Less than significant
with mitigation
Solid Waste:

Potentially significant
Solid Waste:

MM UTIL-17 through MM UTIL-22

Solid Waste:

Less than significant
Solid Waste:

EIR No. 311: Reduced

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
Telecommunication:

Less than
significant with
mitigation
Telecommunication:

No impact
Telecommunication:

Potentially significant
Telecommunication:

MM UTIL-22
Telecommunication:

Less than significant
Telecommunication:

EIR No. 311: Consistent

SEIR No. 340: Consistent
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-21 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.1 – AESTHETICS
MM AES-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall submit plans which illustrate that all mechanical equipment and trash areas for the subject buildings will be screened from adjacent public streets and adjacent residential areas. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.12-2)
MM AES-2 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, private streets within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area shall have street lights installed which are compatible with the design standards used for the public streets as determined by the Public Utilities Department. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-5)
MM AES-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit for each parking facility along Walnut Street; to be implemented prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit plans which detail the lighting system for the parking facilities along Walnut Street, Ball Road, Haster Street and along interior property lines abutting residential neighborhoods . The systems shall be designed and maintained in such a manner as to conceal light sources to the extent feasible to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent uses. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed electrical engineer, with a letter from the engineer stating that, in the opinion of the engineer, this requirement has been met. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.12-4)
MM AES-4 Prior to final building and zoning inspection or whenever established; and, on an ongoing basis, for the Disneyland Resort, the applicant property owner/developer shall participate in a landscape assessment and maintenance district, if one is established for the Anaheim Resort. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.12-5) MM AES-5 Prior to approval of each grading plan or issuance of each demolition or building permits, whichever occurs first, a Construction Barrier Plan showing the location and types of barriers to be in place during grading and construction. Said plan shall provide for all construction areas to be screened from view in compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code and shall include provision for the type and height of the barriers to be placed along all construction perimeters prior to the commencement of demolition, Site preparation or grading, whichever occurs first. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.8-2)
MM AES-6 Prior to approval of final site plan or issuance of each building permit whichever occurs first, the proposed Specific Plan incorporates design guidelines as well as zoning and development standards, many of which have been designed to reduce the potential visual impacts of the project and to present a visually integrated resort area, including:
 The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan provides for heavily landscaped streetscapes and gives the guidelines for trees and shrubs, light fixtures, benches, monuments, and signs located within the landscaped area.  The East and West Parking Areas and the hotel parking facilities will have landscaped setbacks from the public right-of-way and are restricted in height.  Rights-of-way will be landscaped to add to the aesthetics of the area.  The landscape treatments will vary to create distinct places visually.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-22 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
 The West Parking Area and hotel parkin g facilities will be terraced back from Walnut Street with landscaping treatments above 40 feet. In addition, canopy trees will be planted in a center median on Walnut Street, and the parkway along the street will be landscaped.
 A coordinated color theme for major street features will be incorporated into the design.
 The service areas and back-of-house areas will be screened from public view.  All rooftop equipment on buildings will be screened as per the Specific Plan.  A layered landscape treatment in the setback realm will provide screening of a 9-14 feet in height sound wall adjacent to the Southwest Parking Area. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.12-1)
MM AES-7 Prior to issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be shown on plans as fully screened from view of adjacent public rights-of-way and from adjacent properties by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. A note indicating that these improvements will be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-2)
MM AES-8 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be shown on plans as shielded from public view and the sound buffered to comply with City of Anaheim noise ordinances from any adjacent residential or transient-occupied properties. A note indicating that these improvements shall be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-12)
MM AES-9 Prior to Final Site Plan approval issuance of each building permit for theme park uses within the Theme Park District, the Southeast District, and the ARSP Theme Park Overlays , plans shall show that the rear elevations of buildings visible from off-site areas sha ll be architecturally accented to portray a finished look compliance with the 360-Degree Architectural Treatment Criteria set forth in the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-13)
MM AES-10 Prior to Final Site Plan approval issuance of each building permit , plans shall show that no shuttle/bus/vehicular drop-off areas shall be permitted in hotel/motel or vacation ownership resort front setback area. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-14) MM AES-11 Ongoing, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the removal of any on-site graffiti within 24 hours of its application. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-3) MM AES-12 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, root and sidewalk barriers shall be provided for trees within seven feet of public sidewalks. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-6) MM AES-13 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning and Building Department a letter from a licensed landscape architect certifying that all landscaping and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with landscaping plans approved in connection with the Final Site Plan building permit. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-7)
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-23 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
MM AES-14 Ongoing, all on-site non-Public Real m landscaping and irrigation systems, and Public Realm landscaping and irrigation systems, within an area in which dedication has not been accepted by the City, shall be maintained by the property owner/developer, in compliance with City standards. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-8) MM AES-15 Ongoing, any tree planted within the Setback Realm shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-9)
MM AES-16 Ongoing, a licensed arborist shall be hired by the property owner/developer to be responsible for all tree trimming. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-10) MM AES-17 Prior to issuance of each building permits, unless records indicate previous payment, the property owner/developer shall pay a fee for street tree purposes shall be paid or cause to be paid to the City of Anaheim based on the length of street frontage in an amount as established by City Council resolution or credit against the fee given for City authorized improvements installed by the property owner/developer. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-11)
MM AES-18 Prior to final site plan approval issuance of each building permit , the property owner/developer shall submit a shade and shadow analysis to the Planning and Building Department for review and approval demonstrating that the proposed structure(s) would avoid creating significant shade and shadow impacts on adjacent land uses to the maximum extent feasible. A significant shade and shadow impact would occur when outdoor active areas (e.g., outdoor eating areas, hotel/motel swimming pools, and residential front and back yards) or structures that include sensitive uses (e.g., residences) have windows that normally receive sunlight are covered by shadows for more than 50 percent of the sunlight hours.

(SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-1)
MM AES-19 Prior to final site plan approval issuance of each building permit , the location and configuration of all lighting fixtures including ground-mounted lighting fixtures utilized to accent buildings, landscape elements, or to illuminate pedestrian areas shall be shown on all plans submitted for building permits final site plans. All proposed surface parking area lighting fixtures shall be down-lighted with a maximum height of 12 feet adjacent to any residential properties. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded to direct lighting toward the area to be illuminated and away from adjacent residential property lines.
(SEIR No. 340, MM 5.1-4)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-24 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.2 – AIR QUALITY
SR AQ-1 Prior to issuance of the first grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence of compliance to the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager that all construction activities shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403, which shall assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. SCAQMD Rule 402 requires that air pollutant emissions not be a nuisance off site. SCAQMD Rule 403 (Tables 1, 2, and 3 of Rule 403) requires that fugitive dust be controlled with the best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. This requirement shall be included as notes on the contractor specifications. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.2-1)
SR AQ-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall submit evidence that low emission paints and coatings are utilized in the design and construction of all buildings in compliance with SCAQMD regulations, including SCAQMD Rule 1113. This information shall be denoted on the project plans and specifications. The property owner/developer shall also submit an architectural coating schedule and calculations demonstrating that VOC emissions from architectural coating operations would not exceed 75 pounds per day averaged over biweekly periods. The calculations shall show, for each coating, the surface area to be coated, gallons (or liters) of coating per unit surface area, and VOC content per gallon (or liter). The property owner/developer shall also implement the following to limit emissions from architectural coatings and asphalt usage:
a. Use nonsolvent-based coatings on buildings, wherever appropriate; b. Use solvent based coatings, where they are necessary. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.4-5; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.2-2, SR 5.2-2)
MM AQ-1 Prior to final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall comply with all SCAQMD offset regulations and implementation of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) for all permitted any new and or modified stationary sources. Copies of permits shall be given to the Planning Department. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.4-2; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.2-5)
MM AQ-2 Ongoing during operation of The Disneyland Resort, the applicant property owner/developer shall implement the following measures to reduce emissions:
a. To the extent practicable, schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours.
b. Use clean fuel for attraction rides and other uses, as practicable. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.4-3; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.2-1)
MM AQ-3 Prior to issuance of the first building permit associated with a cumulative total of over 10,000 square feet of for theme park the second theme park development in the Southeast District or Theme Park East Overlay, whichever occurs first, the applicant property owner/developer shall submit a site and operations plan for this facility showing the location and configuration of the on-site cast financial and dining services in conformance with The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-25 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
Prior to final building and zoning inspections associated with a cumulative total of over 10,000 square feet of theme park development in the Southeast District or Theme Park East Overlay, the property owner/developer shall provide cast financial and dining services within the Southeast District or Theme Park East Overlay and the Theme Park District to accommodate cast members.

Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall continue to provide cast financial and dining services in conformance with The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan.

Prior to final building and zoning inspections for the second theme park, the applicant shall provide cast financial and dining services within the Theme Park District and Hotel District to accommodate cast members. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.4-4) MM AQ-4 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the future expansion district development, excluding the south parking area; and, oOngoing during project operation, the following will be achieved: (1) the 1.5 AVR target for all cast and (2) the average length of the out-of-area guest stay of 1.72 days, or a demonstration that the SCAG VMT reduction targets have been met through other means. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.4-6)
MM AQ-5 Ongoing during construction, the following measures will be followed by the property owner/developer to reduce air quality impacts:
a. Normal wetting procedures (at least twice daily) or other dust palliative measures shall be followed during earth-moving operations to minimize fugitive dust emissions, in compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code including application of chemical soil stabilizers to exposed soils after grading is completed and replacing ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as practicable;
b. For projects where there is excavation for subterranean facilities (such as parking) on-site haul roads shall be watered at least every two hours or the on-site haul roads shall be paved.
c. Enclosing, covering, watering twice daily, or applying approved soil binders, according to manufacturer’s specification, to exposed piles. d. Roadways adjacent to the project shall be swept and cleared of any spilled export material at least twice a day to assist in minimizing fugitive dust; and haul routes shall be cleared as needed if spills of material exported from the project site occur.
e. Where practicable, heavy duty construction equipment shall be kept onsite when not in operation to minimize exhaust emissions associated with vehicles repetitiously entering and exiting the project site.
f. Trucks importing or exporting soil material and/or debris shall either be covered prior to entering public streets or shall comply with the vehicle freeboard requirements of Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code for both public and private roads. This California Vehicle Code section stipulates that the load, where it contacts the sides, front and back of the cargo container area, remain six inches from the upper edge of the container area, and that the load does not extend, at its peak, above any part of the upper edge of the cargo container area.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-26 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
g. Taking preventive measures to ensure that trucks do not carry dirt on tires onto public streets, including treating onsite roads and staging areas. h. Preventing trucks from idling for longer than 2 minutes. i. Manually irrigate or activate irrigation systems necessary to water and maintain the vegetation as soon as planting is completed.
j. Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less.
k. Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gust) exceed 25 miles per hour and during second stage smog alerts. l. Comply with the SCAQMD Rule 402, which states that no dust impacts offsite are sufficient to be called a nuisance, and SCAQMD Rule 403, which restricts visible emissions from construction.
m. Use low emission mobile construction equipment (e.g., tractors, scrapers, dozers, etc.) where practicable.
n. Utilize existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary power generators, where practicable. o. Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them properly tuned. p. Use low sulfur fuel for equipment, to the extent practicable. q. Should demolition, grading, or, excavation activities of two or more projects within any portion of the Project site occur concurrently, air quality monitoring shall be conducted each day that demolition and grading/excavation activities occur concurrently; monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 and ensure that PM2.5 and PM10 concentrations shall not exceed the established regulatory limit of 50 micrograms per cubic meter.
(EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-4; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.2-3)
MM AQ-6 Prior to issuance of each grading permit (for Import/Export Plan) and prior to issuance of demolition permit (for Demolition Plan), other than for the Disneyland Administration Building or the relocation of the SCE transmission lines, the property owner/developer shall submit Demolition and Import/Export Plans. The plans shall include identification of offsite locations for material export from the project and options for disposal of excess material. These options may include recycling of materials onsite, sale to a soil broker or contractor, sale to a project in the vicinity or transport to an environmentally cleared landfill, with attempts made to move it within Orange County. The applicant property owner/developer shall offer recyclable building materials, such as asphalt or concrete for sale or removal by private firms or public agencies for use in construction of other projects, if not all can be reused on the project site. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-5; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.2-4)
MM AQ-7 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall implement the following to limit emissions from architectural coatings and asphalt usage:
a. Use nonsolvent-based coatings on buildings, wherever appropriate.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-27 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
b. Use solvent-based coatings, where they are necessary, in ways that minimize solvent emissions.
c. Encourage use of high-solid or water-based coatings. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.8- 6)
MM AQ-8 Prior to issuance of building permits for each of the east and west public parking structures and any parking structure in the Southeast District ; ongoing during project operation, all public day-use parking facilities, not including hotel, hotel accessory uses or cast parking facilities, will have a crew of cast members, based on parking predictions, on each lot or facility level, to assist speed parking procedures. In addition, the East and West public parking structures and any parking structure in the Southeast District will incorporate the following design features on each facility level, to assist speed parking procedures:

1. Signage designed to enhance smooth traffic flows and reduce traffic flows on each facility level.

2. Speed ramps which will take cars directly to the level that has available spaces, thus eliminating circulation movement and time involved with hunting for a space. The speed parking striping and procedures currently used at the Disneyland theme park parking lot will be adapted to use within the parking structures and will be designed to safely park 60 cars per minute. (Refer to Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, in The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan.)

3. Ceiling clearances and lateral clearances, an open well design, and enhanced lighting levels will eliminate the enclosed feeling of a standard garage, which tends to slow drivers. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.4-5)
MM AQ-9 Prior to final building and zoning inspection for the second theme park; o Ongoing during project operation, the applicant property owner/developer will implement a comprehensive and aggressive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all project employees. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.4-8) MM AQ-10 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall implement, and demonstrate to the City, that project design will incorporate the following energy-saving features. This energy savings will also contribute to reduced measures that are being taken to reduce operation-related air quality impacts. These measures may include, but are not limited to the following:
a. Improve thermal integrity of structures and reduced thermal load through use of automated time clocks or occupant sensors.
b. Incorporate efficient heating and other appliances.
c. Incorporate energy conservation measures in site orientation and in building design, such as appropriate passive solar design and proper sealing of buildings.
d. Use drought-resistant water-wise landscaping wherever feasible to reduce energy used in pumping and transporting water.
e. To the extent feasible, provide daycare opportunities for employees or participate in a joint development daycare center.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-28 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
f. Install facilities for electric vehicle recharging, unless it is demonstrated that the technology for these facilities or availability of the equipment current at the time makes this installation infeasible. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.4-6; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.2-6)
MM AQ-11 Prior to issuance of each building permit for public day-use parking facilities, the public parking facilities, which may be used for theme park guest parking, shall be designed in accordance with the speed parking procedures set forth in Section 7.0, Zoning and Development Standards, of the The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan which will assist in reducing vehicular fuel from idling engines. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.14-2)
MM AQ-12 Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a human health risk assessment (H RA) for any proposed sensitive land uses (according to SCAQMD standards at that time) to be located within 500 feet of the near edge of the I-5 freeway unless it is demonstrated that the health risks have been determined to be acceptable according to the standards of the SCAQMD at the time of building permit application. (SEIR No. 340 MM 5.2-7) MM AQ-13 During construction activities, for all offroad engines that are diesel and above 50 brake horsepower, the contractor shall use engines that comply with USEPA Tier 4 offroad engine standards.

MM AQ-14 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, if two or more dust-generating construction projects, which collectively will disturb 15 acres or more and which have demolition, excavation, or grading activity scheduled to occur concurrently, a Localized Significance Threshold analysis shall be prepared. If the LST analysis determines that the established Localized Significance Thresholds for NOx, PM2.5, or PM10 would be exceeded, then modifications to construction equipment profiles, modifications to construction schedules, or additional pollution reduction measures shall be implemented.

PDF AQ-1 Prior to final building and zoning inspection for the second theme park; and o Ongoing during project operation, the project has been designed to reduce dependence on the private automobile, which will reduce and avoid many of the traffic-related emissions associated with the existing Disneyland theme park and Disney California Adventure Park , as well as those normally associated with hotels and day-use only special event activities and those associated with development of theme park uses in the Southeast District or Theme Park East Overlay. Guests will be encouraged to park their cars and leave them for the duration of their visits, thus eliminating the trips to restaurants and sightseeing, or entertainment attractions normally associated with vacation stays. Marketing efforts in Southern California will promote the Disneyland Resort as a mini-vacation site for Southland residents. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.4-2)
PDF AQ-2 Ongoing during project operations, Prior to final building and zoning inspection for the second theme park, a wide range of entertainment, lodging, retail and restaurant attractions will be located within the project area and will be linked by an electrically powered monorail system, pedestrian ways/guest transportation system to transport visitors from parking facilities to The Disneyland Resort, and/or pedestrian bridges, walkways and promenades. Convenient walkway access within the Theme Park District, the Southeast District and the Theme Park East Overlay Hotel District and adjacent uses, such as the City of Anaheim DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-29 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
Convention Center, will also facilitate pedes trian trips by non-project guests who will remain within the project area rather than use automobiles to travel to restaurants and entertainment outside of the area. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.4-3) PDF AQ-3 In accordance with transportation and circulation mitigation measures, The Disneyland Resort traffic will be accommodated, and existing traffic conditions and circulation patterns will be improved through implementation of the identified transportation and parking features, including parking facilities, monorail and pedestrian way/guest transportation systems and convenient access to parking facilities from the freeway. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.4-4)
PDF AQ-4 The Disneyland Resort Project will include Prior to final building and zoning inspection for the second theme park, there will be a special drop-off area on Harbor Boulevard north of Disney Way Freedman Way, or internal or adjacent to the East Parking Area Parking Structure and/or adjacent ARSP Parking Overlay , or other accessible location, for shuttle buses to help encourage use of buses by area visitors. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.4-7)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-30 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.3 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
MM BIO-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs first, a letter detailing the proposed schedule for vegetation removal and building demolition activities shall be submitted to the Planning and Building Department, verifying that removal shall take place between August 1 and January 31February 28 to avoid the bird nesting season. This would ensure that no active nests would be disturbed. If this is not feasible, then a qualified Biologist shall inspect any trees which would be impacted prior to demolition, grading or construction activities to ensure no nesting birds are present. If a nest is present, then appropriate minimization measures shall be developed by the Biologist the property owner/developer shall implement MM BIO-2. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.3- 2)
MM BIO-2 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, and if Project demolition and/or vegetation clearing must occur during the bird nesting season (February 1–July 31), a pre- construction nesting bird survey for active raptor nests of structures to be demolished and/or vegetation to be removed shall be conducted by a qualified Biologist no more than three days prior to such work occurring and submitted to the Planning and Building Department 30 days prior to commencement of any demolition or construction activities during the raptor nesting season (February 1 to June 30) and within 500 feet of a fan palm, juniper, or canary island pine. If the Biologist does not find any active nests within or immediately adjacent to the impact area, the vegetation clearing/construction work shall be allowed to proceed. The pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be updated following any work stoppage of two weeks or longer.

Should If an active nest of a bird species protected under California Fish and Game Code or the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is identified within or immediately adjacent to the construction area, and the Biologist determines that the nest may be impacted or breeding activities substantially disrupted, be identified,restrictions defined by a qualified Biologist will be placed on construction activities in the vicinity of any active nest observed until the nest is no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist the Biologist shall delineate an appropriate no-impact buffer zone (at a minimum of 25 feet) around the nest depending on the sensitivity of the species and the nature of the construction activity. All nests and associated buffers shall be mapped on the construction plans. The active nest shall be protected until nesting activity has ended . These The following restrictions to clearing and/or construction activities shall be required until nest(s) are no longer active, as determined by a qualified Biologist: (1) clearing limits shall be established within a buffer around any occupied nest (the buffer shall be 25–100 feet for nesting birds and may include a 300- to 500-foot buffer zone designated around a nest to allow construction to proceed while minimizing disturbance to the active nest feet for nesting raptors), unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist; and (2) access shall be restricted within the buffer of any active nest, unless otherwise determined by a qualified Biologist. Encroachment into the buffer area around a known nest shall only be allowed if the Biologist determines that the proposed activity would not disturb the nest occupants.

Once the qualified Biologist has determined that fledglings have left the nest, there is no evidence of a second nesting attempt, or the nest has failed the DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-31 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
nest is no longer active, construction can proceed within the buffer zone. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.3-1)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-32 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.4 – CULTURAL RESOURCES
SR CUL-1 Before and during construction, if human remains are discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin, and disposition pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 has occurred. (SEIR No 340, SR 5.4-1)
MM CUL-1 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified archaeologist that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented:
a. The archaeologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures for archaeological monitoring, as well as for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts if potentially significant artifacts are uncovered. Specific monitoring procedures will be established based on review of site specific conditions, including presence of native soils, anticipated construction activities, and nature of ground disturbance including depth of excavation. If artifacts are uncovered and determined to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvage.
b. Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process shall be donated to an appropriate educational or research institution. c. Any archaeological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified archaeologist. If any artifacts are discovered during grading operations when the archaeological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area until the monitor can survey the area.
d. A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted to the City Engineer. Upon completion of the grading, the archaeologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted Planning and Building Department within ninety days . (EIR No. 311, MM

3.13-1; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.4-1)
MM CUL-2 For properties within the ARSP, p Prior to approval of building, grading or demolition permits, whichever occurs first, a final site plans for properties that contain a structure over 45 years old, property owners/developers shall submit to the Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division, documentation to verify the presence/absence of historic resources. On properties where resources are identified, such documentation in accordance with HABS standards shall provide a detailed mitigation plan, including a monitoring program and recovery and/or in situ preservation plan, based on the recommendations of a qualified specialist. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.4-3)
MM CUL-3 Prior to the issuance of grading, demolition or building permits, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for implementing the following and submitting the required documentation to the Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division: If an individual development project within the potential Disneyland Theme Park Historic District proposes to substantially alter or demolish a contributing feature to the potential Disneyland Theme Park Historic District as identified in the Historic Resources Technical Report attached as Appendix E-2 to Subsequent EIR No. 352, that contributing DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-33 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
feature shall be documented in the outline format as specified in the HABS History Guidelines,1 and photographed according to the HABS Photography Guidelines,2.

The documentation shall be prepared by a historian or architectural historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Professional Standards in the relevant discipline. Digital copies of the documentation shall be submitted to the Anaheim Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division for storage with Heritage Services, and housed in the Walt Disney Company archives.

MM CUL-4 Prior to the issuance of grading, demolition or building permits, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for implementing the following and submitting the required documentation to the Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division: If any of the individually designated or potentially eligible features or buildings within the theme park, as identified in the Historic Resources Technical Report attached as Appendix E-2 to Subsequent EIR No. 352, are proposed for substantial alteration or demolition, that feature or building shall be documented individually in the outline format as specified in the

HABS History Guidelines, and photographed according to the HABS Photography Guidelines. The documentation shall be prepared by a historian or architectural historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Professional Standards in the relevant discipline. Digital copies of the documentation shall be submitted to the Anaheim Planning and Building Department, Planning Services Division for storage with the Heritage Services Division, and housed in the Walt Disney Company archives.

1 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, HABS History Guidelines, updated January 2020, https://www.nps.gov/hdp/standards/HABS/HABSHistoryGuidelines.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 2 U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, HABS Photography Guidelines, updated June 2015, https://www.nps.gov/hdp/standards/PhotoGuidelines.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023).

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-34 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.5 – ENERGY
SR ENE-1 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall be required to prepare and submit to the City for review and approval (1) a Landscape Documentation Package and (2) landscape and irrigation plans with appropriate water use calculations in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 10.19, Landscape Water Efficiency. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.15-1)
SR ENE-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Planning Department, Building Division that building plans meet the applicable California Green Building Standards (24 CCR 11). (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.17-2)
MM ENE-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans and calculations to demonstrate that the energy efficiency of each building will exceed the Title 24, Part 6, Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings current at the time of application by at least 10 percent. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.9-2 and MM 3.10.10-1; SEIR No. 340, SR 5.17-1 and MM 5.17-3)
MM ENE-2 Prior to issuance of the first Building Permit for Phases II and III, the applicant shall enter into the agreement with the City (dated March 18, 1997) to meet the increased electrical demands for opening day (June 30, 2001) of The Disneyland ResortAny new system improvements (e.g., substation, line connections), if required, shall be constructed in accordance with the City’s Electric Rates, Rules and Regulations and Electrical Specifications. Electrical Service Fees and other applicable fees will be assessed in accordance with the then current Electric Rates, Rules and Regulations and Electrical Specifications. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.9-3; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.17-2)
MM ENE-3 Prior to approval of each final building and zoning inspection, the Southern California Gas Company has developed several programs which are intended to assist in the selection of most energy-efficient water heaters and furnaces. The property owner/developer shall implement a program, as required, to reduce the demand on natural gas supplies. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.10-2) MM ENE-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall demonstrate on plans that fuel-efficient models of gas-powered building equipment have been incorporated into the proposed project to the extent feasible. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.14-2)
MM ENE-5 Prior to approval issuance of a building permit Final Site Plan, the property owner/developer shall coordinate with the Public Utilities Department to incorporate feasible renewable energy generation measures into the project.

These measures may include but not be limited to use of renewable biofuels, solar and small wind turbine sources on new and existing facilities and the use of solar powered lighting in parking areas. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.17-4) PDF ENE-1 Prior to final building and zoning inspection the second theme park Ongoing during project development and operation, the project shall be developed in conformance with The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and shall offer a broad diversity of theme park, retail, dining and entertainment experiences which will enhance the destination resort character of The Disneyland Resort. As a result, DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-35 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
many visitors will extend their length of stay; thus, incremental vehicular trips to and from the site are expected to be reduced. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.14-1)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-36 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.6 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS
SR GEO-1 All grading operations will be conducted in conformance with the Anaheim Municipal Code, Title 17, Land Development and Resources, and the most recent version of the California Building Code (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.5-1).

MM GEO-1 Prior to approval of each grading plan, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division, for review and approval a thorough soils and geological report for the area to be graded, based on proposed grading and prepared by an engineering geologist and geotechnical engineer. The report shall comply with Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.6-1)
MM GEO-2 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning and Building Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, detailed foundation design information for the subject building(s), prepared by a civil engineer, based on recommendations by a geotechnical engineer. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.6-2; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.5-1) MM GEO-3 Prior to issuance of each foundation permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a report prepared by a geotechnical engineer to the Planning and Building Department, Building Services Division for review and approval, which shall investigate the subject foundation excavations to determine if soft layers are present immediately beneath the footing site and to ensure that compressibility does not underlie the footing. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.6-3; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.5-2) MM GEO-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Planning and Building Department, Building Services Division for review and approval showing that the proposed structure has been analyzed for earthquake loading and designed according to the most recent seismic standards in the California Building Code adopted by the City of Anaheim. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.6-4; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.5-3)
MM GEO-5 Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning and Building Department, Building Services Division geologic and geotechnical investigations in areas of potential seismic or geologic hazards and provide a note on plans that all grading operations shall be conducted in conformance with the recommendations contained in the applicable geotechnical investigation. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.5-6)
MM GEO-6 Ongoing during grading activities, the property owner/developer shall implement standard practices for all applicable codes and ordinances to prevent erosion to the satisfaction of the Planning and Building Department, Building Services Division. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.5-5)
MM GEO-7 Prior to issuance of each grading permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter identifying the certified paleontologist meeting the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standards that has been hired to ensure that the following actions are implemented:
a. The paleontologist must be present at the pre-grading conference in order to establish procedures for paleontological monitoring, as well as for to temporarily halting or redirect ing work to permit the sampling, identification, DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-37 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
and evaluation of fossils if potentially significant paleontological resources are uncovered. If artifacts fossils are uncovered and found to be significant, the paleontological observer monitor shall determine appropriate actions in cooperation with the property owner/developer for exploration and/or salvageshall administer appropriate actions based on SVP protocols3. b. Specimens that are collected prior to or during the grading process will shall be donated toreposited in an appropriate educational or research institution.

Preparation, storage and curation shall be funded by the property owner/developer.
c. Any paleontological work at the site shall be conducted under the direction of the certified paleontologist. If any fossils are discovered during grading operations when the paleontological monitor is not present, grading shall be diverted around the area discovery by a buffer of at least 50 feet.

Construction shall not resume until the monitor can survey the areapaleontological monitor has given the order to proceed in that location once a determination on the significance of the fossil discovery has been made.
d. A final report detailing the findings and disposition of the specimens shall be submitted. Upon completion of the grading, the paleontologist shall notify the City as to when the final report will be submitted.
(EIR No. 311, MM 3.13-2;
SEIR No. 340, MM 5.4-2)

3 Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP), Guidelines from the Ethics Education Committee for Collecting, Documenting and Curating Fo ssils (last updated 2021). https://vertpaleo.org/wp- content/uploads/2021/01/Guidelines-from-the-Ethics-Education-Committee.pdf (accessed August 18, 2023).

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-38 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.7 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Section 5.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, incorporates SRs, MMs, and PDFs from Section 5.1, Air Quality; Section 5.5, Energy; Section 5.9; Hydrology and Water Quality; Section 5.14, Transportation; and Section 5.16, Utilities and Service Systems.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-39 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.8 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
SR HAZ-1 All construction activities, including demolition and renovation of the existing facilities and installation of the new facilities, shall be performed in compliance with all CalOSHA standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 8) to protect worker health and safety. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.7-1)
SR HAZ-2 The removal and disposal of any lead-based paint (LBP) encountered on site during Project implementation shall be performed by an LBP Abatement Contractor that is licensed and registered in California pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 17. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.7-2)
SR HAZ-3 Activities at the Project Site shall comply with existing federal, State, and local regulations regarding hazardous material use, storage, disposal, and transport. All on-site generated waste t hat meets hazardous waste criteria shall be stored, manifested, transported, and disposed of in accordance with the California Code of Regulations (Title 22) and in a manner to the satisfaction of the local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA), as applicable.

All transport and transfer of hazardous materials shall be performed by a licensed hazardous waste hauler in compliance with all applicable State and federal requirements, including U.S. Department of Transportation regulations under Title 49 (Hazardous Materials Transportation Act) and Title 40, Section 263 (Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) of the Code of Federal Regulations; California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards; and Division of Occupational Safety and Healthy (Cal/OSHA) standards. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.7-3)
SR HAZ-4 All construction activities, including demolition and renovation of the existing facilities and installation of the new facilities, shall be performed in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1403 requiring a survey for and proper abatement of asbestos-containing materials prior to construction.

MM HAZ-1 Prior to any relocation of transformers within non-Disney-controlled properties or City-owned transformers within the Specific Plan Area that may contain PCBs which are being moved or relocated as part of project development, the transformers shall be tested by the property owner/developer for PCBs. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.11-8)
MM HAZ-2 Ongoing during demolition and construction, in the event that hazardous waste, including asbestos, is discovered during site preparation or construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that the identified hazardous waste and/or hazardous material are handled and disposed of in the manner specified by the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5), according to the requirements of the California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22, and the Uniform Fire Code, Article 87.

(EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-10; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.7-6)
MM HAZ-3 Prior to approval of the first a grading plan or issuance of a the first Phase I dDemolition pPermit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall submit a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared pursuant to DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-40 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
current ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments to identify potential threats to human health and the environment plan for review and approval by the Fire Department by the City. If possible hazardous materials are identified during the site assessments, the appropriate response/remedial measures will be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Orange County Health Care Agency (OCHCA) and/or the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), as appropriate. The ESA shall which details procedures that shall be taken if a previously unknown underground storage tank (UST) or other unknown hazardous materials or waste is discovered onsite. The ESA shall outline where hazardous materials may be found, types of hazardous materials anticipated, how to screen for them, and what to do in the event they are identified. The ESA shall identify the party responsible for the screening, and training requirements for those responsible for undertaking the screening effort. The ESA shall specify requirements for reporting, handling, staging, disposal, and recordkeeping.

The ESA shall also identify contingencies in the event that significant contamination is identified that is 1) above regulatory thresholds and 2) cannot be removed/mitigated remediated by proposed construction. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.11-5; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.7-4 and MM 5.7-7)
MM HAZ-4 Prior to Approval of the First Grading Plan or issuance of the first a grading or demolition permit, whichever occurs first, in areas known or thought to have been previously occupied by underground storage tanks (USTs), or other hazardous materials or waste, and in areas where tank removal has not been verified prior to excavation or grading; for Each Phase, the property owner/developer shall retain the services of a qualified environmental professional to conduct an investigation for known, or the presence of, cryptic tanks using geophysical methods that include the potential use of ground penetrating radar (GPR) or similar technologies to determine no abandoned USTs are present shall be conducted in the subject area for the property owner/developer by a qualified environmental professional in the areas of former service stations and those areas known or thought to have been formerly occupied by USTs and where tank removal has not been verified prior to excavation or grading in these areas.

Soil sampling or a soil organic vapor survey may be required if soil sampling results are not available or indicate contamination is present above regulatory guidelines.

If warranted, subsurface investigation and sampling shall be undertaken in these areas, and appropriate remediation measures developed, if necessary, before demolition, excavation, or grading takes place in these areas. (EIR No. 311, MM

3.11-2; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.7-1)
MM HAZ-5 Prior to the removal of underground storage tanks (USTs), the property owner/developer shall obtain a permit from the Hazardous Materials Management section of the Fire Department shall be obtained for removal of such underground tanks by the property owner/developer. During removal of the underground storage tank, a representative from the Hazardous Materials Section (HMS) of the Fire Department Environmental Protection Section shall be onsite to direct soil sampling. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.11-3; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.7-2) MM HAZ-6 Ongoing during remediation, all remediation activities of surface or subsurface contamination not related to underground storage tanks (USTs), conducted on behalf of the property owner/developer of surface or subsurface contamination DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-41 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
not related to underground storage tanks shall be overseen by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) and witnessed by Anaheim Fire Department/Hazardous Material Management Section (HMS).Orange County Health Department. Information on subsurface contamination from an underground storage tank shall be provided to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) with a copy to Planning & Building. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.11-4; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.7-3) MM HAZ-7 Prior to issuance of each demolition permit, a hazardous building material survey shall be conducted to verify the absence of hazardous building materials and, if needed, future abatement by a California-licensed contractor, and/or removal and disposal in accordance with federal, state, and local transportation and disposal regulations.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-42 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.9 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
SR HWQ -1 Development projects that will result in soil disturbance of one (1) or more acres of land shall comply with the State’s Construction General Permit by filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Prior to the issuance of preliminary or precise grading permits, the property owner/developer shall provide the City Engineer with evidence that an NOI has been filed with the SWRCB by providing a copy of the NOI invoice and the assigned Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) No. for the project. The SWPPP shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed with a goal of preventing a net sediment load increase in storm water discharges relative to preconstruction levels and shall prohibit during the construction period discharges of storm water or non- storm water at levels which would cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable water quality standards contained in the Basin Plan. The BMPs shall address erosion control, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non-storm water management and waste management and materials pollution control during all phases of construction, including a sampling and analysis plan for sediment and non-visible storm water pollutants. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for proper implementation of the SWPPP. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.8-1)
SR HWQ -2 Prior to issuance of the precise grading permit, the property owner/developer shall prepare Water Quality Management Plans (WQMPs) for review and approval by the Public Works, Development Services. The WQMP shall identify permanent site design, source control and treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on the site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The WQMP shall also describe the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the treatment control BMPs and the mechanism for funding the BMPs. The WQMP shall be recorded against the property to ensure long-term compliance. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.8-2)
SR HWQ-3 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for Disney ARSP Properties , the property owner/developer shall pay the Storm Drain Impact Fees which would go toward future storm drain improvements within The Anaheim Resort area and South Central City area. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.8-3)
SR HWQ -4 Chapter 10.09 of the Anaheim Municipal Code is the City’s NPDES Ordinance, which provides regulations to comply with the CWA, the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the City’s NPDES permit. This ordinance prohibits the discharge of specific pollutants into the storm water; regulates illicit connections to the storm drain system; requires development projects to implement permanent BMPs on individual sites to reduce pollutants in the storm water; and requires local discharge permits for non-storm water discharges into the storm drain system. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.8-4)
SR HWQ -5 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the property owner/developer of individual developments shall provide written proof to the Public Works Department, Development Services Division of a water quality certification and/or waste discharge requirement (WDR) as well as a plan for compliance with the discharge prohibitions, TMDLs, and various programs of the Santa Ana RWQCB. The Santa Ana RWQCB implements the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin through the through issuance of individual WDRs; discharge prohibitions; DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-43 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
water quality certifications; programs for salt management, non-point sources, and storm water; and monitoring and regulatory enforcement actions, as necessary. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.8-5)
MM HWQ-1 Prior to approval of the Phase II grading planOngoing during Project operations, to be implemented in accordance with the phasing plan; and, prior to approval of phase III grading plan; to be implemented in accordance with the phasing plan, the property owner/developer shall submit comply with the Master Drainage and Runoff Management Plan (MDRMP) and shall submit updates as required for new grading for review and approval by the City Engineer. The Master Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following items:
a. Backbone storm drain layout and pipe size, including supporting hydrology and hydraulic calculations for storms up to and including the 100-year storm. b. A delineation of the improvements to be implemented for control of project- generated drainage and runoff.
c. Detailed assessment of existing water quality, potential water quality impacts, and a description of proposed measures to maintain water quality to the extent required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and its regulations, including the following:

1. Incorporation of structural and nonstructural City controlled Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs shall, to the extent permitted by law, include, but are not limited to, containment of masonry and paint wastes on the construction site; proper disposal of vehicle fuel and maintenance wastes; disposal of trash and debris; prohibiting water wash down of paved areas (both during and after construction unless allowed by the NPDES permit); and education/training for construction workers on these practices.

Engineering details, maintenance procedures, and funding responsibilities of these BMPs shall also be described.

2. Incorporation of measures to comply with applicable actions to be identified by the RWQCB in conformance with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) statewide water quality control plan for inland surface waters, adopted April 11, 1991.

3. Description of a water quality monitoring program to monitor water quality during and subsequent to construction and to evaluate the effectiveness of BMPs. The water quality monitoring program shall identify: (1) the person/agency responsible for implementing the program, (2) sources of pollutants in runoff (e.g., nuisance flows from development areas, irrigation flows), (3) specific types of pollutants expected in runoff that will be monitored (e.g., total suspended solids, phosphorous, lead), (4) water quality sampling stations that are representative of runoff from the sources identified above, (5) sampling program methodology, including devices to be used and frequency and duration of sampling, ( 6) method for evaluating data collected from a sampling program, including threshold standards for determining effectiveness of BMPs, and (7) additional measures, if necessary, to increase the effectiveness of the BMPs to the threshold standards identified in C(l) above. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.7-2; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.8-1)
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-44 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
MM HWQ-2 Exclusive of the Theme Parks including the retail/entertainment component, prior to issuance of each building permit (for non Setback Realm Areas); prior to approval of Final Site Plan (for Setback Realm Areas); for the West Parking facility: prior to approval of initial building permits for interim condition of a portion of the West Parking Area (for the final landscape plans for the Walnut Street Setback area and for the area adjacent to the Walnut Street soundwall in the private realm); and prior to approval of building permits for the ultimate condition of the West Parking Areas (for the final landscape plans for West Street/Disneyland Drive setback landscape, Cerritos Ave. setback landscape, landscaping at entrance to hotels and landscaping interior to hotel and RD&E parking), Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit landscaping and irrigation plans and an Irrigation Management Program. This landscape plan shall include a maintenance program to control the use of fertilizers and pesticides, and an irrigation system designed to minimize surface runoff and overwatering. Additionally:
a. The landscape plans shall be prepared and certified by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape architect shall submit plans in accordance with Anaheim’s Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance and Guidelines including:

1. Project Information

2. Maximum Applied Water Use expresses as annual totals.

3. Soil management report or specifications.

4. Landscape design plan.

5. Irrigation design plan.

6. Grading design plan.
b. The Irrigation Management Program shall specify methods for monitoring the irrigation system and shall be designed by an irrigation engineer (plans to be submitted in accordance with the Specific Plan). The system shall ensure that irrigation rates do not exceed the infiltration of local soils and that the application of fertilizers and pesticides do not exceed appropriate levels of frequencies.
c. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be developed to be consistent with the provisions of the Specific Plan, which require that the Estimated Applied Water Use (EAWU) to be less than the Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) or that the landscape irrigation system include water-conserving features such as low-flow irrigation heads, automatic irrigation scheduling equipment, flow sensing controls, rain sensors, soil moisture sensors, and other water- conserving equipment. In addition, all irrigation systems shall be designed so that they will function properly with reclaimed water, if it should become available. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.7-3; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.15-4) MM HWQ-3 Ongoing during operation of the Disneyland Resort, the applicant property owner/developer shall provide for the following: cleaning of all paved areas not maintained by the City of Anaheim including, but not limited to, private streets and parking lots on not less than a monthly basis. Using water to clean streets, parking lots, and other areas shall be allowed on a periodic basis if allowed in the applicant's property owner/developer’s NPDES permit and allowable based on drought restrictions. Nightly washdown shall be allowed in the theme parks and, where advisable to maintain safe and sanitary working conditions, the back-of-house area, if allowed in the applicant's property owner/developer and City's NPDES permit.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-45 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
Flushing debris, residue, and sediment down the storm drains shall conform to the applicant's NPDES requirements. Applicant Property owner/developer agrees that material deposited in City storm drains shall not be in violation of the City's NPDES permit. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.7-4; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.8-3) MM HWQ-4 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection (for non-Setback Realm Areas); prior to acceptance by City Engineer (for Setback Realm Areas), the property owner/developer shall submit a Certificate of Substantial Completion, as described in the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, which establishes that the landscape irrigation systems have been installed as specified in the approved landscaping and irrigation plans. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.7-5)
MM HWQ-5 Ongoing during grading operations, the property owner/developer shall implement standard practices from all applicable codes and ordinances to prevent erosion. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-2)
MM HWQ-6 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for sites that disturb more than one (1) acre of soil, the property owner/developer shall obtain coverage under the NPDES Statewide Industrial Stormwater Permit for General Construction Activities from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence of attainment shall be submitted to the Planning and Building Department, Building Services Division. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-3; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.8-2)
MM HWQ-7 To be installed with project water mains; to be connected if reclaimed water becomes available; For the West Parking Facility: prior to approval of initial building permits for interim condition of a portion of the West Parking Area (for the final landscape plans for the Walnut Street Setback area and for the area adjacent to the Walnut Street soundwall in the private realm); and prior to approval of building permits for the ultimate condition of the West Parking Area (for the final landscape plans for West Street/Disneyland Drive setback landscape, Cerritos Ave. setback landscape, landscaping at entrance to hotels and landscaping interior to hotel and RD&E parking), to reduce the project's demand on potable water, Prior to issuance of each building permit, t o reduce the project's demand on potable water, the property owner/developer shall install water lines onsite so that reclaimed water may be used for landscape irrigation and other purposes, if and when it becomes available. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.7-1; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.8-5) MM HWQ-8 Prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit a letter from a licensed landscape architect to the City certifying that the landscape installation and irrigation systems have been installed as specified in the approved landscaping and irrigation plans. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.8-4) MM HWQ-9 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence that all storm drain, sewer, and street improvement plans shall be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.8-6)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-46 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.10 – LAND USE AND PLANNING
MM LU-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, building plans shall be submitted by the property owner/developer and will be reviewed for consistency with The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. (EIR No 311, MM 3.1-2)
MM LU-2 Prior to approval of each final site plan or issuance of each building permit, whichever occurs first, the proposed project shall be implemented based on the guidelines and standards in The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, which includes zoning and development standards, design guidelines, and a Public Facilities Plan.

All development proposals within The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area must be consistent with The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan , the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, and the City of Anaheim General Plan. (EIR No 311, PDF 3.1-1) MM LU-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit for parking facilities associated with the Hotel and Parking, the property owner/developer shall submit plans detailing the setbacks for the parking structures and landscaping plans which minimize compatibility impacts of the parking facilities on surrounding areas, consistent with Section 5.8 of the The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. (EIR No 311, MM 3.2-2)
PDF LU-1 Prior to approval of each final site plan or issuance of each building permit, whichever occurs first, property owner/developer applicant shall submit documentation that project design features are in compliance with all building setbacks, height standards, landscaping requirements, and design guidelines as specified in Section 7.0 of Appendix B, The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan. (EIR No 311, PDF 3.2-1)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-47 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.11 – NOISE
SR NOI-1 Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, contractor specifications shall include a note indicating that noise-generating construction activities which produce a sound pressure level at any point along the property line in excess of 60 dBA shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM on any day, except on Sundays or a City-recognized holiday when no noise-generating construction activities shall be permitted. This requirement is identified in Section

6.70.010 of the City of Anaheim’s Noise Ordinance. Additional work hours may be permitted if deemed necessary by and on approval of the Director of Public Works or Building Official. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-7; SEIR No. 340, SR 5.10-1) SR NOI-2 Development shall comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, also known as the California Building Standards Code, which establishes building standards applicable to all occupancies throughout the state. Title 24 requires that new hotels, motels, and multi-family residences be designed to prevent the intrusion of exterior noise so that the interior noise, attributable to exterior sources, shall not exceed the 45 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) in any habitable room with windows closed. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.5-5; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.10-9, SR 5.10-2)
SR NOI-3 No commercial use shall produce noise associated with continual loading or unloading of heavy trucks at the site between the hours of 8:00 PM and 6:00 AM (Municipal Code Section 18.32.130). (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.10-3) MM NOI-1 Ongoing during project operation of the second theme park, the property owner/developerapplicant shall obtain pyrotechnic permits (on an annual basis.

Additions or modifications to firework shoots shall require a separate permit) a permit for use of fireworks. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.5-2) MM NOI-2 Additionally, the following shall be implemented Oongoing during project operations, lLower noise-producing fireworks displays will be used at Disney California Adventurethe Second Theme Park to minimize noise from 11:00 p.m. fireworks shows to meet the noise levels in the City of Anaheim Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.5-1 )
MM NOI-3 No aerial fireworks show shall be allowed west of Disneyland Drive in the expanded Theme Park District, the Southeast District or the ARSP Theme Park Overlays. Prior to the commencement of any show in these areas that includes fireworks that are non-explosive (i.e., stage pyrotechnics) or explosive fireworks with an explosion point at an elevation less 50 feet (e.g., Fantasmic!), the property owner/developer shall present a noise study to the Planning and Building Department to demonstrate that noise leve ls from the fireworks would meet the City’s 60 dBA Sound Pressure Levels standard at the property line, and would not create a noise increase greater than 5 d BA over existing ambient noise at the nearest noise sensitive receptor, whichever is more restrictive.

MM NOI-4 Prior to issuance of a building permit for an amphitheater, plans submitted for the location of the amphitheater will document that the facility is no closer than 2,000 feet from the nearest existing residence. The design and orientation of the amphitheater will be reviewed by a certified acoustical engineer; the applicant property owner/developer shall submit a report, for review and approval by the City, to ensure that noise from the amphitheater does not exceed the noise levels DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-48 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
established by the City of Anaheim Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.5-3)
MM NOI-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspection for the amphitheater and within 9 months of commencement of amphitheater operations, a Noise Monitoring Program prepared by a certified acoustical engineer shall be submitted for review and approval. The applicant property owner/developer shall submit the results of the Noise Monitoring Program conducted by a certified acoustical engineer to ensure that there are not violations of the Sound Pressure Level Ordinance from amphitheater operations outside the Disneyland Resort. If noise in excess of the Sound Pressure Level Ordinance is detected, the applicant property owner/developer shall modify operations within three days to bring the amphitheater into conformance with the Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.5-4)
MM NOI-6 Ongoing during construction and project operations of the second theme park, engine noise from sweeping equipment used in the public parking facilities, South Parking Area facilities and any hotel parking facilities adjacent to residential areas shall be muffled. Sweeping operations in the parking facilities and private on-site roadways shall be performed utilizing sweeping/scrubbing equipment which operate at a level measured not greater than 60 dBA at the nearest adjacent property line. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.5-7; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.10-7) MM NOI-7 Prior to issuance of each building permit, to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, for structures that are adjacent to residential areas or other sensitive uses , the applicant property owner/developer shall present plans and calculations to the Planning and Building Department to demonstrate that noise levels from ensure that all mechanical ventilation units, loading docks, trash compactors, and other proposed on-site noise sources are designed to meet the City’s 60 DBA Sound Pressure Levels standard at the property line, and not create a noise increase greater than 3 dBA over existing ambient noise at the nearest noise sensitive receptor, whichever is more restrictive are shown on plans and installed in compliance with the Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.5-8; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.10-3 and MM 5.10-10)
MM NOI-8 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall ensure that all internal combustion engines on construction equipment and trucks are fitted with properly maintained mufflers. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-9; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.10-1) MM NOI-9 Prior to issuance approval of each building permit final site plan, the property owner/developer shall submit a noise study prepared by a certified acoustical engineer to the satisfaction of the Building Division Manager identifying whether noise attenuation is required and defining the attenuation measures and specific performance requirements, if warranted, to comply with the CaliforniaUniform Building Code and Sound Pressure Level Ordinance. Ultimate noise attenuation requirements, if any, shall depend on the final location of such buildings and noise- sensitive uses inside and surrounding the buildings. Attenuation measures , such as but not limited to acoustic sound barriers, shall be implemented by the property owner/developer prior to final building and zoning inspections. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.10-2)
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-49 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
MM NOI-10 Prior to issuance of each building permit for construction within 75 feet of noise sensitive receptors , a note shall be provided on building plans indicating that during construction, the property owner/developer shall install and maintain specially designed construction barriers between the project perimeter and the sensitive receptor at the project perimeter areas. The construction sound barriers shall be a minimum height of 8 feet with a minimum surface weight of 1.25 pounds per square foot or a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 25. The structure shall be a continuous barrier. Gates and other entry doors shall be constructed with suitable mullions, astragals, seals, or other design techniques to minimize sound leakage when in the closed position. Access doors should be self closing where feasible. Vision ports are permissible providing they are filled with an acceptable solid vision product. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-8; SEIR No. 340, MM

5.10-5)
MM NOI-11 Ongoing during construction and project operation, pressure washing operations for purposes of building repair and maintenance due to graffiti or other aesthetical considerations and in areas along the property line or accessible by the public shall be limited to daytime hours of operation between 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.10-6)
MM NOI-12 Ongoing during construction, property owners/developers shall pay for all reasonable costs associated with noise monitoring which shall include monitoring conducted by a certified acoustical engineer under the direction of the Planning and Building Department four times a year on a random basis to ensure that outdoor construction-related sound levels at any point on the exterior project boundary property line do not exceed 60 dBA between the hours of 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM of the following day where outside construction is occurring. If a complaint is received by the City, additional noise monitoring shall be conducted at the discretion of the City. If the monitoring finds that the 60 dBA threshold is being exceeded, construction activities will be modified immediately to bring the sound level below the 60 dBA requirement, with additional follow-up monitoring conducted to confirm compliance. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.10-8) MM NOI-13 Prior to issuance of each building permit, a note shall be provided on plans indicating that there shall be no operation of clam shovel drops or vibratory rollers within 25 feet of any existing home. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.10-11) MM NOI-14 Prior to issuance of each building permit on Disney ARSP Properties if pile driving and blasting is anticipated during construction, a noise and vibration analysis must be prepared and submitted to the Planning and Building Department to assess and mitigate potential noise and vibration impacts related to these activities, including site design features such as setbacks and trenches. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.10-12)
MM NOI-15 Prior to issuance of each building permit and to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall present area development plans if part of a new theme park land or building plans if part of one theme park attraction to the Planning and Building Department to demonstrate any development of theme park uses in the expanded Theme Park District (west of Disneyland Drive), the Southeast District, or the ARSP Theme Park Overlays includes 30-foot-tall buildings or structures between the property line near residential or other noise sensitive land uses and the proposed theme park land or theme park attraction. If a noise barrier is provided, such as a ride façade, the DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-50 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
material used shall have a minimum surface weight of 1.25 pounds per square foot or a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 25.

MM NOI-16 The property owner/developer shall pay all reasonable costs associated with noise monitoring which shall include monitoring conducted by a certified acoustical consultant or engineer under the direction of the Planning Department to ensure that The Disneyland Resort ongoing operations do not exceed 60 dBA at any point on the property line between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. of the following day. If the monitoring finds that the 60 dBA threshold is being exceeded, modifications to the ongoing operations, such as adjustments to volume at the source or orientation of speakers, shall be commenced immediately to bring the sound level below the 60 dBA requirement with additional follow-up monitoring conducted to confirm compliance. Monitoring shall be conducted as follows:

(a) Ongoing: Semi-annually on a random basis for a three (3) day period. (b) During the first five (5) years of operation of theme park uses in the expanded Theme Park District west of Disneyland Drive, the Southeast District, and/or the ARSP Theme Park Overlays: Four (4) times a year on a random basis for a three (3) day period.
(c) In response to a noise complaint, at the City’s discretion: For a three (3) day period at the location of the noise exceedance.

MM NOI-17 Prior to the issuance of each building permit, grading permit or demolition permit, a note shall be provided on the plans stating that ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would respond to neighborhood complaints about construction noise by determining the cause of the noise complaints and requiring implementation of reasonable measures to correct the noise issue.

MM NOI-18 Ongoing during construction, the property owner/developer shall locate all stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors and portable generators a minimum of 75 feet from noise sensitive receptors.

MM NOI-19 Ongoing during construction, n o impact driven piles shall be allowed in conjunction with the construction of parking structures. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.5-6) MM NOI-20 Prior to issuance of a building permit for a parking structure, the property owner/developer will submit plans to the Planning and Building Department indicating noise from the parking structure will be reduced by the provision of convenient access to the parking structure, sound attenuation devices (louvers and walls), and the use of textured deck surfaces to reduce tire squealing.

MM NOI-21 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall present plans to the Planning and Building Department to demonstrate development of theme park uses in the expanded Theme Park District (west of Disneyland Drive), the Southeast District, or the ARSP Theme Park Overlays shall include installation and maintenance of at least 12-foot-tall noise barriers along the property line to reduce back-of-house noise, such as vehicle pass-bys and truck deliveries with a minimum surface weight of 1.25 pounds per square foot or a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 25.

MM NOI-22 Prior to issuance of each building permit and to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall present a DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-51 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
noise study and area development plans if part of a new theme park land or building plans if part of one theme park attraction in the expanded Theme Park District (west of Disneyland Drive), the Southeast District, or the ARSP Theme Park Overlays to the Planning and Building Department to demonstrate any Thrill (Indoor) and Family (Indoor) attractions shall be located no less than 200 feet from the center of the ride or attraction to noise-sensitive receptors and shall include a 30-foot-high building or a 30-foot high noise barrier between the attraction and the property line near noise-sensitive receptors. The planning of each attraction shall take into account any openings or outdoor areas of the attractions and directionally orient the openings away from noise-sensitive receptors and towards the center of the new theme park development.

MM NOI-23 Prior to issuance of each building permit and to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall present a noise study and area development plans if part of a new theme park land or building plans if part of one theme park attraction in the expanded Theme Park District (west of Disneyland Drive), the Southeast District, or the ARSP Theme Park Overlays to the Planning and Building Department to demonstrate any Thrill (Outdoor), rides taller than 50 feet, Parades and Large Shows shall be located:

1. For 1st to 3rd Offsite Floor Receptors: No less than 550 feet from the center of the ride to any noise-sensitive receptor and shall include a 30-foot-high building or a 30-foot-high noise barrier between the attraction and the property line near noise-sensitive receptors.

2. For 4th Floor Offsite Receptors and above (i.e., no shielding from 30-foot buildings/barriers): No less than 1100 feet between the center of the ride and any noise-sensitive receptor. If the distance of 1100 feet cannot be met, an indoor rollercoaster shall be considered. If a distance less than 1100 feet is considered with exposure to 4th Floor receptors, the distance to noise- sensitive receptors and layout shall be reviewed by a certified acoustical consultant or engineer prior to finalizing the site plan. In general, the entire full height of the ride shall include a solid barrier shielding it from any noise- sensitive receptors. The material used for the barrier shall have a minimum surface weight of 1.25 pounds per square foot or a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 25.

MM NOI-24 Prior to issuance of each building permit and to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall present a noise study and area development plans if part of a new theme park land or building plans if part of one theme park attraction in the expanded Theme Park District (west of Disneyland Drive), the Southeast District, or the ARSP Theme Park Overlays to the Planning and Building Department to demonstrate any Family (Outdoor), Round and Small Show attractions shall be located at least 400 feet from sensitive receptors and include a 30-foot-high building or a 30-foot-high noise barrier between the attraction and the property line near noise-sensitive receptors.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-52 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.12 – POPULATION AND HOUSING
PDF POP-1 Ongoing during project operations, the existing Disneyland theme park and the Disneyland Hotel special employment programs such as summer employment for teachers and educational programs offering local high school students jobs will continue. The Walt Disney Company will also aggressively recruit workers who are already a part of the resident work force in the region. Implementation of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan will further efforts in offering employment opportunities at various socioeconomic levels. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.9-1)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-53 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.13 – PUBLIC SERVICES
Fire
MM PS-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit for development in the ARSP Parking and Theme Park Overlaysthe final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall provide evidence to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager of full payment of app licable fire facilities fees as deemed appropriate by the Fire Department pay all applicable fire fees in the amount then in effect and in accordance with the City-adopted Fire Protection Facilities and Paramedic Services Impact Fee Program (initially established through City Council Resolution No. 95R-73). Alternatively, the City and the Property Owner/Developer may enter into alternative financing arrangements. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.1-8; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-9 and SR 5.12-1) MM PS-2 Prior to commencement of structural framing on each parcel or lot, onsite fire hydrants shall be installed and c harged, as required, by the property owner/developer. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.1-2; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-5) MM PS-3 Prior to approval of each grading plan, the property owner/developer shall submit an emergency fire access plan to ensure that service to the site is in accordance with the Fire Department service requirements. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.1-3; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-6)
MM PS-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall submit a Construction Fire Protection Plan which shall include detailed design plans for accessibility of emergency fire equipment, fire hydrant location, and any other construction features required by the Fire Marshal. The property owner/developer shall be responsible for securing facilities acceptable to the Fire Department and hydrants shall be operational with required fire flow. A construction plan providing a complete timeline and construction goals shall be provided and approved by the Fire Department for all new construction projects. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.1-4; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-11)
MM PS-5 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to each final building and zoning inspection, plans shall indicate that all buildings, exclusive of parking structures, shall have sprinklers installed by property owner/developer, to include all open and closed parking structures, exclusive of one-story detached accessory buildings of less than 120 square feet in floor area, and free standing shade structures that ar e open on at least two sides to sufficiently prevent the accumulation of smoke and hot gases. Additionally, alternatives to automatic sprinkler systems (e.g., self-contained water mist systems) that provide an equivalent level of fire protection may be approved for other buildings on a case-by-case basis upon review and approval by the Fire Department. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.1-5; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-7) MM PS-6 Prior to issuance of each building permit, plans shall be submitted to ensure that development is in accordance with the City of Anaheim Fire Department Standards, including:
a. Overhead clearance shall not be less than 14 feet for the full minimum width of 26 feet for all designated fire access roads.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-54 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
b. All fire access roads, bBridges and underground structures to be used for Fire Department access shall be designed to support Fire Department vehicles weighing 78,000 75,000 pounds.
c. All underground tunnels shall have sprinklers. Water supplies (hydrants) are required at the entrances. Standpipes shall also be provided when determined to be necessary by the Fire Department.
d. Adequate off-site public fire hydrants contiguous to the Specific Plan area and onsite private fire hydrants shall be provided by the property owner/developer.

The precise number, types, and locations of the hydrants shall be determined during building permit review. Hydrants are to be a maximum of 300 400 feet apart.
e. A minimum residual water pressure of 20 psi shall remain in the water system.

Flow rates for all structures the public parking facilities shall be a minimum of set at 1,000 to 1,500 gallons per minute gpm.
f. Fire access roads shall be provided with vertical and horizontal clearance in compliance with Fire Department standards. Any changes to emergency vehicle access roads shall be included in the overall emergency vehicle access plans for the Resort area, and maintained by property owner/developer. The Fire Code Official shall review all proposed changes and determine whether to approve any deviations from these standards.
g. Temporary structure regardless of type of construction shall be considered temporary if at a location for less than 6 months. Other than pre-fabricated construction trailers, structures that are at a location for more than 6 months shall be provided with a fire suppression system and/or fire notification/life safety systems applicable to the use of the structure.
h. Integrated Safety Systems (ISS) testing as designed by the property owner/developer or an updated equivalent shall be required for all attractions on an annual basis. The property owner/developer shall provide advance notice to the Fire Department to coordinate witnessing of such testing at the Fire Code Official’s discretion. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.1-6; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-8)
MM PS-7 Prior to issuance of the first building permit in phase II for the DisneylandForward Project or as otherwise specified in the Development Agreement between the City and Disney, the property owner/developer shall enter into a Fire Operations Agreement with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid its fair share of the funding for one additional fire inspector to address the Operations and Community Risk Reduction staffing needs to maintain adequate levels of service of response and ongoing fire inspection of the Project and in the Anaheim Resort. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.1-7)
MM PS-8 Prior to approval of street improvement plans and water improvement plans, the water supply system shall be designed by the property owner/developer to provide sufficient fire flow pressure and storage for the proposed land use and fire protection in accordance with Fire Department requirements. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.1-9; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-6)
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-55 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
MM PS-9 Prior to the final building and zoning inspection for a hotel/motel, the property owner/developer shall submit an earthquake emergency evacuation response plan for review and approval by the Fire Department. The plan shall require posted notices in all hotel rooms on emergency evacuation earthquake safety procedures and incorporate ongoing emergency evacuationearthquake training for hotel staff to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.6-5 and MM 3.6-6; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.5-4)

MM PS-10 Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and prior to the issuance of each building permit, plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department as being in conformance with the CaliforniaUniform Fire Code. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-12)
MM PS-11 Prior to the placement of building materials on a building site, an all-weather fire access road shall be provided from the roadway system to and on the construction site and for fire hydrants at all times, as required by the Fire Department. Such routes shall be paved or, subject to the approval of the Fire Department, shall otherwise provide adequate emergency access. Every building constructed must be accessible to Fire Department apparatus. The width and radius of the driving surface must meet the requirements noted in the Anaheim Municipal Code and in accordance with City of Anaheim Fire Department Standards of Section

10.204 of the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City of Anaheim. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-13)
MM PS-12 Prior to approval of building plans, the property owner/developer shall provide written evidence to the satisfaction of the Fire Department that all lockable pedestrian and/or vehicular access gates shall be equipped with “knox box” devices as required and approved by the Fire Department. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-14)
MM PS-13 Prior to approval of on-site water plans, unless each commercial building is initially connected to separate fire services, an unsubordinated covenant satisfactory to the City Attorney’s Office shall be recorded prohibiting any individual sale of buildings until separate fire services are in stalled in the building(s) subject to the sale. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-15)
MM PS-14 Prior to the issuance of construction permits associated with development of over 10,000 sf within the Theme Park District or as otherwise specified in the Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc., the property owner/developer shall locate and design a Fire Substation within the Theme Park District, in a location approved by the Fire Chief.

The Substation shall meet the below minimum criteria, and is subject to the review and approval of the Fire Chief:

1. Designated parking stalls, for a medic truck, ambulance, medic golf cart, and 2 staff vehicles

2. Equipped with dedicated fiber optic line (services for cable, wifi)

3. Two offices with two workstations each

4. Breakroom/kitchen type area

5. Day room able to accommodate up to 8 personnel (4 paramedics, 2 ambulance, 2 Community Risk Reduction)

6. Restrooms with showers/locker rooms
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-56 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
MM PS-15 Prior to issuance of building permits for any structure greater than 75 feet tall, the property owner/developer shall conduct an analysis to determine if the structure would interfere with the Emergency Radio Response Communication (ERRC) System signal. If warranted based on the analysis, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for installation of new or relocated equipment.

PDF PS-1 Prior to final building and zoning inspections for the Second Theme Park, Oongoing during project operation, the existing services and capabilities of the Disneyland Fire Department shall be maintained within the for the DisneylandForward Project Site . Existing services include preconstruction checks, pre-investigation of fires and alarms, preplanning for fires and evacuations, fire prevention program activities, and monitoring of pyrotechnics and special effects. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.10.1-1)
Police
MM PS-16 Prior to issuance of each applicable building permit, the property owner/developer shall pay all applicable police protection fees in the amount then in effect.

Alternatively, the City and the property owner/developer may enter into alternative financing arrangements.

MM PS-17 Ongoing during operation of the Disneyland Resort Disneyland Resort, the operator of the public parking facilities shall provide an adequate staff of private security officers for patrol and surveillance of the facilities on approval of the Chief of Police or their designee. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.2-2) MM PS-18 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for DisneylandForward Project or as otherwise specified in the Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. Phase II of the Disneyland Resort (excluding the relocation of the SCE transmission lines), the property owner/developer shall enter into an Police Operations Aagreement with the City of Anaheim to pay or cause to be paid its fair share of the funding for police personnel and equipment necessary to meet the service need of the Anaheim Resort as determined by the Chief of Police. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.2-3) MM PS-19 Prior to issuance of each building permit for parking structures, the Police Department shall review the safety measures incorporated into the building plans for the parking structures within the DisneylandForward Project Site Specific Plan area to be submitted by the property owner/developer. The security measures shall include the following or other substitute security measures as may be approved by the Police Department:
 Immediate access in priority criminal cases, where an urgent need or demand exists and time is of the essence.
 For the West and East Parking Structure, and the Southwest Parking Facility, Closed circuit television surveillance and recording equipment or other adequate security measures reviewed and approved by the Police Department shall be provided.
 For the hotel parking structures, clos ed circuit television surveillance and recording equipment shall be provided.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-57 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
 For the Disneyland Administration Building and the South Parking Area (south of Katella Avenue and west of Haster Street), Guarded entrance and exit gates shall be provided. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.2-5; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-2) MM PS-20 Ongoing during operation of the Disneyland Resort Disneyland Resort, the property owner/developerapplicant shall continue to provide anti-gang, human trafficking, child exploitation and substance abuse educational programs which are currently provided for park security cast members . (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.2- 6)
MM PS-21 Ongoing during operations, the Disneyland Security Department shall be maintainedexpanded to provide equivalent levels of service to the entire Disneyland Resort Disneyland Resort. These services will include initial response, investigation, and report writing. Entry points to the theme parks will be patrolled by the Disneyland Security Department. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.10.2-1; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-3)
MM PS-22 Prior to the approval of each Final Site Plan and issuance of each building permit for a hotel , the property owner/developer shall submit plans to the Police Department for review and approval by the Chief of Police, or their designee, for safety, accessibility, crime prevention, a nd security provisions during both the construction and operative phases for the purpose of incorporating safety measures in the project design including the concept of crime prevention through environmental design (e.g., building design, circulation, site planning, and lighting of parking structures and parking areas). (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-1) MM PS-23 Prior to issuance of each building permit for or including a parking lot and/or parking structure , the project design shall include parking lots and parking structures with controlled access points to limit ingress and egress if determined to be necessary by the Police Department and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Police Department. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-4) MM PS-24 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the DisneylandForward Project or as otherwise specified in the Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc., the property owner/developer shall coordinate with the Police Department to construct and maintain a Substation in the Theme Park District which meets the following minimum criteria:
 Designated parking stalls, including EV charging stations, for approximately 4-6 EV, 15-20 regular spaces

 Equipped with dedicated fiber optic line
 Minimum of two private offices
 Conference/briefing room
 Interview room
 Kitchen
 Breakroom
 Locker rooms with showers, restrooms, and lockers
 Enclosed bicycle storage for at least 12 bicycles
 Equipment storage (size equivalent to two offices)
The location and facility components are subject to the review and approval of the Chief of Police. A designee of the Chief of Police shall be included in the initial design phase of the Substation, and shall be regularly consulted during DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-58 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
design and construction. Any subsequent modification or relocation to either facility is subject to the review and approval of the Chief of Police.

MM PS-25 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for development of over 10,000 sf in the Southeast District or Theme Park East Overlay or as otherwise determined in the Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc., the property owner/developer shall coordinate with the Police Department to constr uct and maintain a Satellite Office in the Southeast District or the Theme Park East Overlay which meets the following minimum criteria:
 Designated parking stalls, including 2 -4 EV charging stations, 6 - 8 regular spaces

 Equipped with dedicated fiber optic line
 Breakroom
 Conference/briefing room
 Interview room
 Restrooms
 Enclosed bicycle storage for at least 6 bicycles
The location and facility components are subject to the review and approval of the Chief of Police. A designee of the Chief of Police shall be included in the initial design phase of the Satellite Office, and shall be regularly consulted during design and construction. Any subsequent modification or relocation to either facility is subject to the review and approval of the Chief of Police.

PDF PS-2 Ongoing during project operation, the property owner/developer shall continue to provide and expand its Court Liaison program to meet the needs of the Disneyland Resort. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.10.2-3)
Schools
MM PS-26 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall provide proof that school impact fees have been paid consistent with State statute. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.5-2; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-17)
PDF PS-3 Ongoing during project operations, the existing Disneyland Resorttheme park has developed and/or engaged in a series of educational programs in cooperation with the local community and regional agencies and organizations, designed to enhance and complement the educational opportunities and experiences for the youth.

The 10 educational programs that currently exist are indicated below (see Section 3.10.5, Schools, for detailed information regarding these programs):

1. The Disneyland Creativity Challenge Awards Program Anaheim Union High School District’s Anaheim’s Innovative Mentoring Experience (AIME) program

2. Orange County Young Listeners Concerts Big Brothers & Big Sisters of Orange County’s Workplace Mentoring Program at Anaheim Union High School District

3. Junior Achievement (JA) United Way’s Youth Career Connections and Speakers Bureaus at the Anaheim Union High School District

4. Work Exposure Day at Disneyland Anaheim Family YMCA Avanza Program DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-59 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5. Disney Magic Music Days Orange County Asian Pacific Islander Community Alliance’s ROOTED Career Development Program at Anaheim Union High School District

6. Job Search Strategy Class Hola Readers at Anaheim Elementary School District

7. “Free From Drugs” Program Anaheim Elementary School District’s Broadway Bound: Empowering Young Performers in Anaheim

8. Job Training Opportunities Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Anaheim-Cypress gEARed Up for the Future

9. School Support Programs Girls Inc.’s Girls Meet the Workforce/Project Accelerate

10. CIF Champion Celebration Girl Scouts of Orange County’s Career Exploration Program – Dreams to Reality
The property owner/developer applicant will continue these programs and/or substitute similar programs of equal importance. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.10.5-1) Parks
PDF PS-4 Ongoing during operations Prior to final building and zoning inspections for the Second Theme Park, substantial area within the Disneyland Resort shall be has been designed to encourage utilization by pedestrians in a park-like setting linking key areas of the project as described in the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan .

The pedestrian amenities will include landscaped pedestrian walkways linking West Street/Disneyland Drive to Harbor Boulevard; and a new entry plaza for Disneyland and the Second Theme Park where the guest transportation system will drop off guests from the parking facilities and hotels. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.10.4- 1)
PDF PS-5 Ongoing during operations, the property owner/developer applicant will shall provide space(s) outside the paid theme park gates easily accessible to non- ticketed visitors, where those who have brought their own food can eat. The proximity of amenities such as drinking fountains, vending machines, and restrooms/locker facilities shall be considered in the siting and design of such space(s). (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.10.4-2)
Libraries
MM PS-27 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for development in the ARSP Parking and Theme Park Overlays, with the exception of theme park square footage transferred from the DRSP, the property owner/developer shall comply with the Anaheim Municipal Code , Section 17.08.385, Public Library Facilities Services Areas – Payment of Fees Required. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.12-19)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-60 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.14 – TRANSPORTATION
MM TRA-1 Prior to issuance of each building permit, appropriate traffic signal assessment fees shall be paid by the property owner/developer to the City of Anaheim in amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit or credit given for City-authorized improvements. Ongoing during project development and operations, the property owner/developer shall implement the improvements and pay in lieu fees described in Table 19 (Recommended Intersection Improvements) and Table 20 (Other Transportation Improvements) of the Operational Traffic Analysis for the DisneylandForward Project (Gibson 2023), as set forth in Appendix J-2 of Subsequent EIR No. 352, within the time frames described in those tables .

Prior to the issuance of each building permit, any remaining applicable Traffic Signal Assessment Fees and Transportation Impact and Improvement Fees (Fees) relating to the building permit site shall be paid by the property owner/developer to the City of Anaheim in the amounts determined by the City Council Resolution in effect at the time of issuance of the building permit, except to the extent such fees may have been previously paid or satisfied pursuant to one or more separate agreements between Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. and the City of Anaheim relating to The Disneyland Resort Project or The DisneylandForward Project. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.14-2)
MM TRA-2 Within 120 days of acquiring properties adjacent to arterial highways/street intersection half sections included in (3.3-3A), if, after the initial dedications, any additional parcels are acquired by the applicant adjacent to the arterial highway/street intersection half-sections included in (MM 3.3-3A), the applicant shall notify the City in writing of said acquisition and the ultimate rights-of-way for said properties shall be irrevocably offered for dedication to the City of Anaheim.

Prior to approval of the first final subdivision map or issuance of the first building permit, whichever occurs first, or as otherwise established in Development Agreement between the City of Anaheim and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. or as approved pursuant to a Discretionary Exemption to establish the timing of Street and Other Right-of-Way Dedications and Improvements (Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.40.060 Dedications and Improvements), the property owner/developer shall irrevocably offer for dedication (with subordination of easements), including necessary construction easements, the ultimate arterial highway right(s)-of-way adjacent to their property as shown in the Circulation Element of the Anaheim General Plan. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.3-3B; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.14-3)
MM TRA-3 Prior to demolition of the an existing Disneyland Resort parking lot, replacement parking for the existing Disneyland Theme Park parking spaces removed will be constructed or secured.; prior to final building and zoning inspections for the second theme park, the west parking area will be constructed,
Access Improvements and Public Parking Facilities Included in Project Design (Exhibit 4.3.1b – Interstate 5-West Street/Disneyland Drive Interchange (Showing Entrance to West Parking Facility) and Exhibit 4.3.1c – Interstate 5/Katella Interchange (Showing Entrance to East Parking Facility) (Exhibits 3.2-2 and 3.2-3)
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-61 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
Public Parking Facilities . New public parking facilities will be constructed at opposite sides of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan area to receive traffic from the I-5. At Phase II, Code required parking will be provided. At buildout of Phase IIIOngoing during project operation , a minimum of 24,500 guest and cast parking spaces will be provided. The West Parking Area iswill be oriented to receive southbound I-5 traffic, and the parking facilities in the southern areas of the Theme Park and Hotel Districts and/or East Parking Area and adjacent ARSP Parking Overlay will be oriented to receive northbound I-5 traffic. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.3-1)
MM TRA-4 To be shown on street improvement plans ; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections for each the east and west parking structures/facilities
Improved Access. Access roads leading up to the parking facilities shall be sized to accommodate traffic at peak hours, thereby substantially reducing the likelihood of backups onto City streets and freeway ramps , subject to the approval of the City Engineer.

Guest vehicles will enter and exit the West Parking Area via the proposed extension of West Street/Disneyland Drive. Cast access will enter and exit either at West Street/Disneyland Drive or via a single access on Cerritos Avenue with right-turn in and left-turn out only. No cast or guest access or egress will occur from Walnut Street. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.3-2) MM TRA-5 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections for both the east and west parking structures, Speed Parking. Building plans shall show direct ramps to each level of the East and West Parking Area facilities to minimize internal circulation within the garages and accommodate the project's "speed parking" operation. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.3-3)
MM TRA-6 To be shown on street improvement plans; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspection for each parking structure and/or facility, Conveyance Systems . In addition to an extensive network of landscaped pedestrian thoroughfares, conveyance systems will transport Disneyland Resort guests around the projectThe Anaheim Resort. Guest transportation systems will move guests from the parking facilities to the Theme Park District. The monorail/guest transportation systems shall move guests from the Hotel District to within the Theme Park District. Future connections may also be provided to the Future Expansion Southeast District. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.3-4) MM TRA-7 To be shown on street improvement plans; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections for the second theme park for Phase II; and if pursued, to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections for the east public East Parking Area or adjacent ARSP Parking Overlay parking structure(s) or other accessible location in Phase IIIIV,
Theme Park Drop-Off Area . To provide access to the attractions in the Specific Plan area to people staying outside of The Disneyland Resort area, a bus and shuttle drop-off area will be located adjacent to Harbor Boulevard north of DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-62 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
Freedman Disney Way in Phase II as shown on Exhibit 4.4.2a of the Specific Plan; or, in Phase IIIIV, the facility may be located adjacent or internal to the East Public Parking StructureParking Area or the adjacent ARSP Parking Overlay Parking Structure(s), or other accessible location in the Theme Park or Hotel Districts. The types of vehicles served at this facility may include public and private passenger shuttles and buses. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.3-5; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.14-20) MM TRA-8 Transportation Demand Management Program
Prior to final building and zoning inspection for the Second Theme Park; and, oOn-going during project operation, the need to minimize cast vehicle trips to reduce congestion and improve air quality, consistent with the goals of both the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) of t he South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and with the Regional Mobility Plan of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), is recognized. The Disneyland Resort will implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all cast, which will strive to achieve an average vehicle ridership (AVR) goal of 1.5 persons per vehicle and, an average length of out-of-area guest stay of 1.72 days, by 2001.

At this point in project development, it is not possible to predict precisely which programs and activities would be most successful for t The Disneyland Resort in meeting these goals. In addition, applicant property owner/developer will review annually with the City any changes to the TDM Program and the Program's effectiveness toward achieving a 1.5 AVR. In consultation with the SCAQMD, the City of Anaheim and other agencies, and after analyzing the effectiveness of these items, The Walt Disney Company Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. will select specific programs for implementation.

Objectives of the TDM program are:
 Increase ridesharing and use of alternative transportation modes by guests .  Meet the cast 1.5 AVR target .
 Provide a menu of commute alternatives for t The Disneyland Resort cast, to reduce project-generated trips.
 Provide transportation "linkages" to existing and future transportation modes (other than single-occupant vehicle travel) for both t The Disneyland Resort cast and guests.

Implementation strategies and elements of the TDM program for cast and guest trips are described below.

Cast
Making a commitment to commute management and trip reduction will become an integral part of the new-hire training. A menu of TDM program strategies and elements for both, existing and future cast commute options would be examined, including, but not limited to, the following
:
 Onsite Service. Onsite services, such as the food, retail, and other services may be provided to the cast.
 Ridesharing. An online computer listing of all cast members living in proximity to The Disneyland Resort may be developed for the purpose of DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-63 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
providing a "matching" of members with other cast members who live in the same geographic areas and who could rideshare to tThe Disneyland Resort.  Vanpooling. An online computer listing of all cast members living in proximity to The Disneyland Resort may be developed for the purpose of matching numbers of cast who live in geographic proximity to one another and could comprise a vanpool to tThe Disneyland Resort.
 Transit Pass. Southern California Rapid Transit District and Orange County Transportation Authority (including commuter rail) passes may be promoted through financial assistance and onsite sales to encourage cast to use the various transit and bus services to tThe Disneyland Resort from throughout the region.
 Commuter Bus. As commuter "express" bus service expands throughout the region, passes for use on these lines may be provided for cast members who choose to use this service. Financial incentives will be provided.

 Shuttle Service. A computer listing of all cast members living in proximity to tThe Disneyland Resort may be generated, and a local shuttle program will be offered to encourage cast members to travel to work by means other than the automobile.
 Bicycling. A Disneyland Resort Bicycling Program may be developed to offer a bicycling alternative to cast members. Secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers will be provided as part of this program. Maps of bicycle routes throughout the area would be provided to inform potential bicyclists of these options.

 Rental Car Fleet. A "fleet vehicle" program may be developed to provide cast members who travel to work by means other than an automobile with access to automobiles in case of emergency, medical appointments, etc. This service would help cast members use alternative modes of transportation by ensuring that they would be able to have personal transportation in the event of special circumstances.
 Guaranteed Emergency Ride Home Program . The program may provide cast members who rideshare, or use transit or other means of commuting to work, with a prearranged ride home in a taxi, rental car, shuttle, or other vehicle, in the event of emergencies during the work shift. In essence, this program addresses the concerns of the cast member who rideshares and might be stranded without a vehicle in the event of an emergency.  Local Hiring Efforts. Continue to actively recruit prospective employees within 20 miles.
 Housing Coordinator and Referral Program and Local Hiring Efforts .

Continue to provide referral service to facilitate employees in finding housing and actively recruit prospective employees residing within 30-minute commute shed.
 Target Reduction of Longest Commute Trip. Design an incentives program for ridesharing and other alternative transportation modes to put highest priority on reduction of longest employee commute trips.
 Work Schedule
 Staggered Shifts. The Disneyland Resort cast may work different hours throughout the daily hours of park operation. A thorough review of cast DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-64 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
shifts would be undertaken to provide the potential for cast shifts during nonpeak travel times, thus lessening peak hour congestion.  Compressed Work Week. The Disneyland Resort may review the possibility of developing a "compressed work week" program, which provides for fewer work days but longer daily shifts, as an option for cast members. This program would help eliminate certain trips on certain days that would otherwise be generated daily by tThe Disneyland Resort Cast.  Telecommuting. The Disneyland Resort employs cast members in a wide a variety of jobs including clerical, administrative and professional roles. Sometimes that work can be completed at home.

Telecommuting will be encouraged on a limited basis as operational needs allow. cast in different positions, cast members include clerical, office support, and administrative members. The Disneyland Resort may explore the possibility of a "telecommuting" program that would link some of these cast members to The Disneyland Resort via electronic means (e.g., computer with modem). This would help to eliminate certain trips that would otherwise be generated by a cast member who would otherwise physically need to be at the Disneyland Resort.
 Work Environment/Facility Management
 Parking Management. The Disneyland Resort may develop a parking management program that provides incentives to those who rideshare or use transit means other than single-occupant auto to travel to work.  Management Staff. The existing Disneyland theme park transportation management staff may be expanded onsite to accommodate new employees and to explore relationships with adjacent employers to determine whether joint efforts can lead to greater reductions in VMT by Disneyland Resort cast members and other project employees in the Anaheim Resort.
 Amenities. Transit systems, transit shelters, bicycle storage areas, and other amenities may be provided with efficient parking management for cast and guests.
 Access. Preferential access to high occupancy vehicles and shuttles may be provided.
 Delivery Management. Schedule deliveries in nonpeak traffic congestion hours to the extent reasonably practicable.
 Financial Incentives
In addition to the above items, certain financial incentives will be integrated into The Disneyland Resort TDM program, such as:
 Financial Incentive for Ridesharing and/or Public Transit. Currently, federal law provides tax-free status for up to $60 $300 per month per employee contributions to employees who vanpool or use public transit (including commuter rail and/or express bus pools). In addition, The Disneyland Resort provides free OCTA passes and a 75% subsidy (up to $100/month) for other transit passes.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-65 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
 Financial Incentive for Bicycling and Walking. Cast members may be offered financial incentives for bicycling to work; they would be provided with secure bicycle racks, lockers, and showers. Cast members may also receive a cash incentive for reporting a bike or walk commute.  Financial Incentive for Carpooling. Cast members may be offered a cash incentive for carpooling to work.
 Special “Premium" for the Participation and Promotion of Trip Reduction. Tickets/passes to project theme parks and/or vacations could be offered to employees who recruit other cast members for vanpool, carpool, or other Disney trip reduction programs.
 Delivery Management. Schedule deliveries in non- peak traffic congestion hours to the extent reasonably practicable.
 Guests
- Even though visitors to The Disneyland Resort are estimated to average nearly four persons per vehicle, additional programs and incentives could and will be provided to encourage even more guest use of ridesharing, transit, and other modes of travel to and from tT he Disneyland Resort. The applicant property owner/developer is currently developing a list of potential programs and is working with the City of Anaheim and OCTA on the provision of convenient linkages to other modes of transportation.

Marketing materials for tThe Disneyland Resort will describe it as an "auto- free" zone with a range of transportation amenities where cars are not needed.
- Bicycle spaces for guests shall be visible from the primary entrance, illuminated at night, and protected from damage from moving or parked vehicles.
 Construction Contractors

The property owner/developer shall provide notification to the general construction contractors regarding the coordination of rideshare services for construction employees provided by the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN). (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.3-15; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.14-5, MM 5.14-6, MM 5.14-8, MM 5.14-9, and MM 5.14-23) MM TRA-9 Ongoing during project operations, the property owner/developer shall continue to participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as the Anaheim Resort Transportation (ART) system, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) in conjunction with the ongoing operation of The Disneyland Resort, including the Disney ARSP Properties. Proof of compliance with this measure shall be submitted to the City Traffic Engineer.

Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner shall join and financially participate in a clean fuel shuttle program such as the Anaheim Resort Transportation (ART) system, and shall participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) in conjunction with the on-going operation of the project. Proof of compliance with this requirement shall be submitted by the Anaheim Transportation Network to the City Traffic Engineer. The property owner shall also record a covenant on the property that requires participation in these programs ongoing during project operation. The form of the covenant shall be approved by the City Attorney’s Office prior to recordation. Proof of compliance with this DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-66 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
requirement shall be the submittal of a copy of the recorded covenant to the City Traffic Engineer. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.3-17; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.14-4) MM TRA-10 Ongoing during construction, if Anaheim Police Department or Anaheim TMC personnel are required to provide temporary traffic control services, the property owner/developer shall reimburse the City, on a fairshare basis, if applicable, for reasonable costs associated with such services. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-11; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.14-7)
MM TRA-11 Prior to issuance of the first demolition, grading or building permit for Phase II, whichever occurs first, excluding permits for relocation of the SCE transmission lines, or for demolition related to relocation of the SCE transmission lines as specified in the Phasing Plan, Ongoing during project operations, the applicant property owner/developer will establish an onsite public information office (which is conveniently and accessibly located) where construction scheduling and phasing information will be available to the public. The public information office shall be open during construction hours. A telephone "hotline" will be provided to the community to allow members of the public to call the office with questions or comments during business hours. At least one liaison officer will be staffed at the office. The liaison officer shall be available to answer questions from the public and shall coordinate with the City of Anaheim, other public agencies, and major developers in the area regarding the coordination of construction activities and infrastructure improvements. The City shall be provided with a monthly summary of the calls received and follow-up actions. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.8-12) MM TRA-12 Prior to issuance of each building permit for The Disneyland Resort or, any other timing specifically provided in this meas ure, excluding the relocation of SCE Transmission lines or the Disneyland Administration Building, the applicant property owner/developer shall submit a Traffic Mitigation and Construction Phasing and Control Plan. To the extent needed, as determined by the Public Works Department, the following project design features (PDF 3.8-1 - 3.8-8) require the applicant to submit at different times the plans for construction of both Phase II and Phase III development. Tthe Traffic Mitigation and Construction Phasing and Control Plan shall identify the following:
a. A Construction Staging Area Plan showing the location and size of the construction staging area. The Plan shall also show how the staging area will be screened from view in compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.8-1)
MM TRA-13 Prior to approval of each grading plan or issuance of each demolition or building permit, whichever occurs first; implemented during grading and construction, a Truck Route Plan identifying truck routes along arterials, avoiding residential areas to the extent feasible and in compliance with the Sound Pressure Level Ordinance.

The Plan shall show conformance with the external noise limits for construction between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. The Plan shall also prohibit construction traffic on residential streets where improvements are not planned and shall provide measures to ensure that truck drivers are directed away from residential streets and travel on approved routes only. Measures to assist in guiding truck movement on the arterial roadway system include, but are not limited to, provision of truck route maps to truck drivers and placement of flagpersons and construction signage at appropriate locations. The Truck Route Plan shall provide for monitoring of street conditions and potential repairing and/or repaving by property DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-67 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
owner/developer after completion of construction as required by the City Engineer. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.8-3)
MM TRA-14 Prior to approval of each grading plan or issuance of each demolition or building permit, whichever occurs first; implemented during grading and construction, a Construction Traffic Management Plan which includes mechanisms to reduce construction-related traffic congestion which shall be implemented during grading and construction, including, but not limited to, the following:

1. Configure construction parking to minimize onsite and offsite traffic interference.

2. Minimize obstruction of through-traffic lanes.

3. Provide flagpersons to guide traffic, as determined in the plan. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.8-4)
MM TRA-15 Prior to approval of each grading plan or issuance of each demolition or building permit, whichever occurs first; implemented during construction, for Phase II and III Southwest Parking Facility, a Trip Reduction Plan (excluding the demolition for or relocation of the SCE transmission lines) for construction crew vehicles shall be prepared to reduce potential vehicle trips on the road and identify parking locations for construction employees and equipment. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.8-5)
MM TRA-16 Prior to approval of each building permit, a Traffic Management Plan for phasing of roadway improvements, specifying the sequencing of construction to do the following:

1. Coordinate scheduling with other planned construction in the area, including the I-5 widening project.

2. Coordinate scheduling with other infrastructure improvements to allow them to be facilitated efficiently during roadway improvements, such as sewer, storm drain, and water line improvements.

3. Outline procedures for any required traffic detours during construction, including provision of tour bus stops.

4. Phase each roadway improvement to allow access to all existing businesses/residential areas. In some instances this will require lane-by-lane renovation, temporary bypass roads, or traffic reroutes.

5. Employ vertical shoring as often as possible. This will minimize the amount of road surface that will be disturbed at a given location.

6. Sequence the construction of each roadway improvement to minimize disruption to residents and businesses.

7. Establish offsite parking and staging areas, where practical and possible, to minimize the impact to existing level of service on adjacent roadways. These offsite parking and staging areas will allow a dispersion of traffic flow to noncritical areas and will encourage bussing of construction workers from the offsite areas to the construction sites.

8. Identify how the project improvement construction schedules and haul routes will be coordinated with other areawide improvements. The applicant property owner/developer shall coordinate with the City of Anaheim Traffic DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-68 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
Management Center (TMC), the Anaheim Convention Center and area hotels to ensure continued operations of these facilities, as well as the continued operation of the existing Disneyland theme park and Disneyland Hotel The Disneyland Resort. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.8-6 and PDF 3.8-8) MM TRA-17 Ongoing during project construction, the applicant property owner/developer shall submit a quarterly update report show ing construction activities for the upcoming quarter which shall include traffic mitigation and control planning and construction scheduling. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.8-9)
MM TRA-18 Prior to approval of each grading plan the applicant property owner/developer shall show how the project will be in compliance with the Traffic Mitigation and Construction Phasing and Control Plan. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.8-11) MM TRA-19 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the location of any proposed gates across a driveway shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer.

Gates shall not be installed across any driveway or private street in a manner which may adversely affect vehicular traffic on the adjacent public streets. Installation of any gates shall conform to the current version of Engineering Standard Detail No. 475. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.14-12)
MM TRA-20 Prior to the issuance of building permits, plans shall show that all driveways shall be constructed with a minimum fifteen (15) foot radius curb returns as required by the City Engineer, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.14-13)
MM TRA-21 Prior to the issuance of building permits or final map approval, whichever occurs first, security in the form of a bond, certificate of deposit, letter of credit, completion guarantee, or cash, in an amount and form satisfactory to the City Engineer shall be posted with the City to guarantee the satisfactory completion of all engineering requirements of the City of Anaheim, including preparation of improvement plans and installation of all improvements, such as curbs and gutters, sidewalks, water facilities, street grading and pavement, sewer and drainage facilities and other appurtenant work, as required by the City Engineer and in accordance with the specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, as may be modified by the City Engineer. Installation of said improvements shall occur prior to final building and zoning inspections. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.14-14)
MM TRA-22 Prior to approval of each tentative tract or parcel map, the following Street Design Elements shall be shown on each tentative tract or parcel map:
a. Street cross-sections, including dimensions, labels, circulation designation (i.e., Resort Secondary) and whether public or private. b. Street grades and vertical alignment.
c. Horizontal alignment, including radii, and cul-de-sac radii. (SEIR No. 340, MM

5.14-10)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-69 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.15 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
SR TCR-1 Prior to approval of any amendment to the ARSP or the City of Anaheim General Plan, the project property owner/developer shall coordinate with the City Planning Department to undergo a solicitation of Native American consultation pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 18 ( California Government Code, Section 65352.3). (SEIR No 340, SR 5.4-2)
MM TCR-1 Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring. Prior to the issuance of any permits allowing ground-disturbing activities that cause excavation to depths greater than current foundations, the property owner/developer or contractor as designee shall provide evidence in the form of an executed Agreement to the City of Anaheim Planning and Building Department that they have retained a qualified Native American tribal monitor to provide third-party monitoring during construction- related ground disturbance activities and to recover and catalogue tribal resources as necessary. The tribal monitor shall be from or approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The agreement shall include (i) professional qualifications of Native American monitor; (ii) detailed scope of services to be provided including but not limited to pre-construction education, observation, evaluation, protection, salvage, notification, and/or curation requirements, as applicable, with final documentation/report to Public Works Inspector; (iii) contact information; (iv) communication protocols between Contractor and Monitor for scheduling to facilitate timely performance; (v) acknowledgment that if the tribal monitor is unavailable or unresponsive based on terms stipulated in the agreement, property owner/developer or contractor as designee may contract with another qualified tribal monitor acceptable to the City. The selection of the qualified professional(s) shall be subject to City acceptance based on generally accepted professional qualifications and certifications, as applicable. The cover sheet of the grading plans shall include a note to identify that third party tribal monitoring is required during excavation and grading activities in accordance with the City- approved Agreement. Contact information for approved tribal monitor shall be provided by the contractor to the City inspector at the pre-construction meeting.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-70 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary

5.16 – UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
SR UTIL-1 Prior to the issue of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall be required to prepare and submit to the City for review and approval (1) a Landscape Documentation Package and (2) landscape and irrigation plans with appropriate water use calculations in accordance with the requirements of Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 10.19, Landscape Water Efficiency. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.15-1) SR UTIL-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide evidence to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager that all sewage and wastewater disposal into the sewer system shall comply with OCSD’s Wastewater Discharge Regulations, including the procurement of the necessary permits by food service establishments that would be developed in the ARSP area. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.16-1)
SR UTIL-3 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of payment to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager for a sanitary sewer service charge to OCSD. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.16-2) SR UTIL-4 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall provide proof of payment to the Planning Director/Planning Services Manager for a capital facilities connection charge to OCSD. (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.16-3) SR UTIL-5 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Planning Department, Building Division that building plans meet the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (24 CCR 6). These standards are updated, nominally every three years, to incorporate improved energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2008 standards, which were applicable January 1, 2010, are approximately 15 percent more energy efficient than the 2005 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.9-2; SEIR No. 340, SR 5.17-1) SR UTIL-6 Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be required to demonstrate to the Planning Department, Building Division that building plans meet the applicable California Green Building Standards (24 CCR 11). (SEIR No. 340, SR 5.17-2)
Water
MM UTIL-1 Among the water conservation measures to be shown on plans and implemented by the property owner/developer within the Specific Plan area include the following:
 Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation system.  Use of waterway re-circulation systems.
 Low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals.
 Use of self-closing valves on drinking fountains.
 Use of reclaimed water for irrigation and washdown when it becomes available.  Continuation of the existing cooling tower recirculation system.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-71 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
 Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors.
 Low-flow shower heads in hotels.
 Water-efficient ice machines, dishwashers, clothes washers, and other water- using appliances.
 Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest.  Provide information to the public in conspicuous places regarding water conservation.
 Use of water-conserving landscape plant materials wherever feasible.  Use of vacuum and other equipment to reduce the use of water for washdown of exterior areas. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.6-2; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.15-1)
MM UTIL-2 Prior to each final building and zoning and building inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit a certified water audit for landscape irrigation systems except for areas within the Theme Parks. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.6-3) MM UTIL-3 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all water supply planning for the project will be closely coordinated with, and be subject to the review and final approval of, the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division and Fire Department. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.15-2)
MM UTIL-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit, water pressure greater than 80 pounds per square inch (psi) shall be reduced to 80 psi or less by means of pressure reducing valves installed at the property owner/developer’s service. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.15-3)
MM UTIL-5 Prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall specifically show that the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment will be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, aboveground and behind the building setback line in a manner fully screened from all public streets and alleys and in accordance with Ordinance No. 4156. Prior to the final building and zoning inspections, the water meter and backflow equipment and any other large water system equipment shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division, in accordance with the building permit plans. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.15-5) MM UTIL-6 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, a separate water meter shall be installed for landscape water on all projects where the landscape area exceeds 1,000 square feet for non-residential uses 2,500 square feet in accordance with Ordinance No. 6160. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.15-7)
MM UTIL-7 Ongoing during project developm ent and operations, the property owner/developer shall implement the following required improvements to the water supply system, in accordance with Anaheim’s Water Rates, Rules and Regulations, Water Services Administrative Procedures and Design Guidelines (APDG), and Water Services Standard Specifications (WSSS), within the timeframes described below or as further determined by the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division. The cost of all Main Extensions, Main Enlargements, abandonments, relocations, and easements documents shall be DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-72 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
paid for by the property owner/developer of the properties served by these mains in accordance with Rule 15A.
 In the Theme Park District, west of Disneyland Drive, all new fire water connections, including but not limited to, those that would serve, private fire hydrants, in The Disneyland Resort shall be made to water mains served by the 335 Pressure Zone. Specifically, no new fire water connections are permissible on existing water mains in Walnut Street or Magic Way. Any new fire connections for buildings adjacent to these mains shall connect to the 20- inch water main in Disneyland Drive.
 The Southeast District shall be served by at least two points of connection with internal looping.
o Any new water service connections along Harbor Boulevard shall require the construction of a 12-inch water main from Convention Way intersection to a point approximately 400-ft north of the intersection. o Any new connection to the existing water main in Clementine Street, north of Orangewood Avenue, shall require replacement of the existing 8-inch water main with a new 12-inch water main.
 Abandon the existing 12-inch water main within the Esplanade between Harbor Boulevard and Disneyland Drive. This work shall be completed concurrently with any proposed improvements along Disneyland Drive or Harbor Boulevard.  New easements may be required where public water infrastructure are located within private property through abandonment(s) of a public right-of-way. Such easements shall limit improvements that impact access for operation and maintenance of existing facilities. Alternatively, the property owner/developer may abandon and/or relocate existing public water infrastructure provided the property owner/developer prepares an analysis to determine any associated and appropriate improvements due to the work. The property owner/developer shall submit the analysis and any associated improvement plans to the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division for review and approval.  Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner/developer shall submit hydraulic analyses to determine the adequacy of existing and proposed facilities if required by the Public Utilities Department, Water Engineering Division.

Wastewater
MM UTIL-8 Prior to issuance of any Building Permit for any new hotel development within the Theme Park District that proposes a portion or the entirety of the hotel project’s sewer flow to discharge to the City sewer system on Harbor Boulevard, north of Katella Avenue, the property owner/developer shall prepare a Sewer Study for review and approval by the City Engineer, funded by the property owner/developer.

Said Sewer Study shall evaluate whether there is adequate capacity in the Harbor Boulevard sewer system to accept the flow from the proposed new hotel use. The Sewer Study shall determine whether the proposed hotel project would create a deficiency in the Harbor Boulevard sewer system or the downstream City sewer system. If the Sewer Study shows there would be deficiency in the Harbor Boulevard sewer system or the downstream sewer system, the Sewer Study shall identify the required sewer system upgrades. If a sewer system upgrade is required, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the design and DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-73 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
construction of the upgrade to the sewer system and all associated improvements [collectively, “Sewer Improvements”]. The City-identified and approved cost of the Sewer Improvements may be credited toward the applicable sewer impact fees for the hotel project upon completion of the Sewer Improvements and acceptance by the City. The design of the Sewer Improvements and the related sewer improvement plans shall be completed prior to issuance of any Building Permit for the hotel project and the sewer improvement plans shall identify all associated improvements required for the required Sewer Improvements. Construction of Sewer Improvements shall be completed prior to final building and zoning inspections for the hotel. If no sewer system upgrade is required, the developer shall be required to pay the applicable sewer impact fees, pursuant to A.M.C.

10.12.085, with applicable credits applied for sewer flows from existing uses to be removed.

MM UTIL-9 Prior to issuance of a plumbing permit resulting in a cumulative flow of more than 50 gpm peak in the Theme Park District resulting in redirected existing sewer flows that currently do not flow to Harbor Boulevard to instead flow to Harbor Boulevard via non-gravity flow (e.g. lift station, force main, ejector pump, etc.), the property owner/developer shall prepare a Sewer Study for review and approval by the City Engineer, funded by the property owner/developer. Said Sewer Study shall evaluate whether there is adequate capacity in the Harbor Boulevard sewer system to accept the proposed redirected flow. The Sewer Study shall determine whether the proposed redirected flow would create a deficiency in the Harbor Boulevard sewer system or the downstream City sewer system. If the Sewer Study shows there would be deficiency in the Harbor Boulevard sewer system or the downstream sewer system, the Sewer Study shall identify the required sewer system upgrades. If a sewer system upgrade is required, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of the upgrade to the sewer system and all associated improvements [collectively, “Sewer Improvements”]. The City-identified and approved cost of the Sewer Improvements may be credited toward the applicable sewer impact fees for the hotel project upon completion of the Sewer Improvements and acceptance by the City. The design of the Sewer Improvements and the related sewer improvement plans shall be completed prior to issuance of any Building Permit for the hotel project and the sewer improvement plans shall identify all associated improvements required for the required Sewer Improvements. Construction of Sewer Improvements shall be completed prior to final building and zoning inspections for the hotel. If no sewer system upgrade is required, the developer shall be required to pay the applicable sewer impact fees, pursuant to A.M.C.

10.12.085, with applicable credits applied for sewer flows from existing uses to be removed.

MM UTIL-10 Prior to issuance of the first building permit for development of over 10,000 sf in the Southeast District or Theme Park East Overlay, the property owner/developer shall prepare a Sewer Study for review and approval by the City Engineer, funded by the property owner/developer. Said Sewer Study shall evaluate whether the total sewer flow proposed to the Katella Avenue sewer system, east of Harbor Boulevard, for development authorized by the DisneylandForward project for the Theme Park East Overlay/Southeast District does not exceed a peak flow of 285 gpm. And that the total sewer flow proposed to be directed to the Harbor Boulevard sewer system, south of Katella Avenue, for development authorized by the DisneylandForward project for the Theme Park East Overlay/Southeast District does not exceed a peak flow of 2,000 gpm (total allowable development within DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-74 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
Theme Park East Overlay/Southeast District). If the projected sewer effluent flow exceeds these stipulated amounts for either the Katella Avenue or Harbor Boulevard sewer system, the Sewer Study shall determine whether the development project creates a deficiency in the Katella Avenue sewer system, east of Harbor Boulevard, or the Harbor Boulevard sewer system, south of Katella Avenue, sewer collections systems and the downstream City sewer system.

Should a deficiency be created, the Sewer Study shall identify the required sewer system upgrades and improvements (“Sew er Improvements”). If Sewer Improvements are required, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of the Sewer Improvements. The City-identified and approved cost of the sewer improvements may be credited toward the applicable sewer impact fees for the development project upon completion of the Sewer Improvements and acceptance by the City. The design of the Sewer Improvements and the sewer improvement plans shall be completed prior to issuance of any Building Permit for development in the Theme Park East Overlay/Southeast District and shall identify all associated improvements required for the required Sewer Improvements. Construction of Sewer Improvements shall be completed prior to the first final building and zoning inspection for development within the Theme Park East Overlay/Southeast District. If no improvement is required, the developer shall be required to pay the applicable sewer impact fees, pursuant to A.M.C. 10.12.085.

MM UTIL-11 Prior to issuance of any Building Permit for any new hotel development within the Parking Overlay (between Harbor Boulevard and Manchester Avenue), the property owner/developer shall prepare a Sewer Study for review and approval by the City Engineer, funded by the property owner/developer. Said Sewer Study shall evaluate the sewer flow from the hotel(s) directed to Clementine Street and ultimately Katella Avenue. Sewer improvements required to address deficiencies in the sewer systems in Clementine Street and/or Katella Avenue, east of Harbor Boulevard, shall be the sole responsibility of the property owner/developer (“Clementine and Katella Sewer Improvements”). Should a deficiency be created, the Sewer Study shall identify the required sewer system upgrades and improvements. If a sewer system upgrade is required, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the design and construction of the Clementine and Katella Sewer Improvement s and all associated improvements.

The City-identified cost of the Clementine and Katella Sewer Improvements may be credited toward the applicable sewer impact fees for the hotel project(s) upon completion of the Sewer Improvements and acceptance by the City. The design of the Clementine and Katella Sewer Improvements and the sewer improvement plans shall be completed prior to issuance of any Building Permit for the hotel project(s) and identify all associated improvements required for the required for the Sewer Improvements. Construction of sewer improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the first hotel development.

If no improvement is required, the developer shall be required to pay the applicable sewer impact fees, pursuant to A.M.C. 10.12.085.

Storm Drains
MM UTIL-12 Prior to approval of a final subdivision map, or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall participate in the City’s Master Plan of Storm Drains and related Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to assist in mitigating existing and future storm drainage system deficiencies as follows:

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-75 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
The property owner/developer shall submit a report for review and approval by the City Engineer to assist with determining the following:
a. If the specific development/redevelopment does not increase or redirect current or historic storm water quantities/flows, then the property owner/developer’s responsibility shall be limited to participation in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program to provide storm drainage facilities in 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency.
b. If the specific development/redevelopment increases or redirects the current or historic storm water quantity/flow, then the property owner/developer shall be required to guarantee mitigation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney’s office of the impact prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first, pursuant to the improvements identified in the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area. The property owner/developer shall be required to install the storm drainage facilities as recommended by the Master Plan of Drainage for the South Central Area to provide storm drainage facilities for 10- and 25-year storm frequencies and to protect properties/structures for a 100-year storm frequency prior to acceptance for maintenance of public improvements by the City or final building and zoning inspection for the building/structure, whichever occurs first. Additionally, the property owner/developer shall participate in the Infrastructure Improvement (Fee) Program as determined by the City Engineer which could include fees, credits, reimbursements, or a combination thereof.

As part of guaranteeing the mitigation of impacts on the storm drainage system, a storm drainage system improvement phas ing plan for the project shall be submitted by the property owner/developer to the City Engineer for review and approval and shall contain, at a minimum, (1) a layout of the complete system; (2) all facility sizes, including support calculations; (3) construction phasing; and, (4) construction estimates. (MM 3.11.8-2 and PDF 3.10.8-1; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.18-1)
MM UTIL-13 Prior to the issuance of building permits, t he City shall require that building plans indicate that new developments will minimize stormwater and urban runoff into drainage facilities by incorporating design features such as detention basins, on- site water features, and other strategies. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.18-3) Electricity
MM UTIL-14 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to each final building and zoning inspection, in order to conserve energy, the Disneyland Resort shall comply with the California Energy Code ( Title 10), which may include the following:
• Consultation with the City energy-conservation experts at the Anaheim Public Utilities Community and Sustainability Division for assistance with energy- conservation design features.
• Use of high-efficiency air conditioning systems , connected if feasible to a computerized central energy management system, and meeting all control, scheduling and load efficiency requirements of the California Energy Code (Title 24, Building Efficiency Standards).

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-76 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
• Use of electric high-efficiency (NEMA) motors intended to conserve energy. • While recognizing the unique lighting apparatus required for some theme park uses, uUse of motion sensing lightswitch devices and light-emitting diode (LED) energy-efficiency lighting fixtures for indoor and outdoor lighting when feasible, T8 lamps, metal hallide and/or high-pressure sodium (HID) lamps.
 Incorporation of electric vehicle chargers into parking structures . (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.10.9-2; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.17-1)
MM UTIL-15 Prior to issuance of a building permit, if the property owner/developer incorporates grid-tied renewable energy generation systems into the project , they shall comply with the Anaheim Public Utilities Department’s most recent Interconnection Guidelines. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.17-4) MM UTIL-16 The property owner/developer shall provide Anaheim Public Utilities Department electrical engineering staff with its forecasted electric demand and schedules to allow for sufficient lead time for planning, design, engineering, materials procurement, and construction of new electrical facilities, if required, to accommodate the Project’s additional or modified electrical demand. Forecasts must be at least two to five years: e.g., two years for the construction of up to two line extensions and five years for the construction of three line extensions or a new substation.

Natural Gas
Section 5.16, Utilities – Natural Gas, incorporates an MM from Section 5.5, Energy.

Solid Waste
MM UTIL-17 Ongoing during theme park operations and prior to final building and zoning inspections of new theme park development, the property owner/developer shall implement a solid waste management plan which has been reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department to ensure that the project plans comply with AB 939, SB 1383 related to reducing organic waste in landfill, the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989, as administered by the City of Anaheim, and the County’s and City’s Integrated Waste Management Plans. Implementation of said plan shall commence upon occupancy and shall remain in full effect as required by the Street and Sanitation Division and may include the following plan components:
a. Detailing the locations and design of on-site recycling facilities. b. Providing on-site recycling receptacles to encourage recycling. c. Complying with all Federal, State, and City regulations for hazardous material disposal.
d. Continuing participation in the City of Anaheim’s voluntary “Recycle Anaheim,” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City.

In order to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939), the property owner/developer shall implement numerous solid waste reduction programs at the Disneyland Resort, including:

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-77 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
 Facilitating paper recycling by providing chutes or convenient locations for sorting and recycling bins.
 Facilitating cardboard recycling (especially from retail areas) by providing adequate space and centralized locations for collections and baling.  Facilitating glass recycling (especially from restaurants) by providing adequate space for sorting and storing.
 Providing trash compactors for nonrecyclable materials whenever feasible to reduce the total volume of solid waste and the number of trips required for collection.
 Prohibition of curbside pick-up within The Disneyland Resort. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.3-2 and MM 3.10.3-3; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.19-1)
MM UTIL-18 Oongoing during project operation, the existing solid waste recycling and waste minimization practices at The Disneyland Resort shall be expanded as feasible to serve new development in The Disneyland Resort. Existing practices include:
 Usage of recycled paper products for stationary, letterhead, and packaging.  Recovery of materials such as aluminum and cardboard.  Collection of office paper for recycling.
 Collection of polystyrene (foam) cups for recycling.
 Collection of glass, plastic, kitchen grease, laser printer, toner, cartridges, oil, batteries, and scrap metal for recycling or recovery. (EIR No. 311, PDF 3.10.3- 1; SEIR No. 340, MM 5.19-2)
MM UTIL-19 Prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall show that trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in a location acceptable to the City of Anaheim Department of Public Works, Operations Division. On an ongoing basis, trash storage areas shall be provided and maintained in accordance with approved plans on file with said Department. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.19-3) MM UTIL-20 Prior to issuance of each building permit, the property owner/developer shall demonstrate that the plans include provisions for the installation of trash and recycle receptacles near all benches and near high traffic areas such as plazas, transit stops and retail and dining establishments. (SEIR No. 340, MM 5.19-4) MM UTIL-21 Ongoing during project operation, upon City request and no less than annually or more than semi-annually, the property owner/developer shall prepare and submit to the Planning Director or Planning Services Manager a consolidated Construction Waste Management Report for all development projects on Disney Properties demonstrating that at least 75 percent of non-hazardous construction and demolition debris has been recycled or salvaged, or has otherwise complied with the City’s waste diversion program, which Report shall identify the materials diverted from disposal and whether the materials have been sorted on site or co- mingled.
(SEIR No. 340, MM 5.19-5)
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

1-78 Section 1.0 – Executive Summary
Television
MM UTIL-22 Excluding the Disneyland Administration Building, a pre-project study of area television reception shall be undertaken by the applicant to determine baseline conditions. After topping out for Phase II and Phase III of the Disneyland Resort, a follow up study of area television reception shall be undertaken immediately by the applicant If warranted based on the analysis, new or relocated equipment would be required. If the City of Anaheim determines that the proposed project creates a significant impact on broadcast television reception at local residences, the property owner/developer shall install a signal booster or relay system shall be installed on the roof of the tallest project building to restore broadcast television reception to its original condition as soon as practicable. (EIR No. 311, MM 3.10.12-1)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-1 Section 2.0 – Introduction
SECTION 2.0

INTRODUCTION

2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
In June 1993, the City of Anaheim (City) certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 311 (State Clearinghouse No. 91051055) in support of the approval of The Disneyland Resort Project, which included the adoption of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (DRSP), on 489.7 acres in the resort area of the City. EIR No. 311 evaluated impacts associated with The Disneyland Resort Project and created Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) No. 0067 in order to mitigate impacts associated with the project. In 1996, in conjunction with an amendment to The Disneyland Resort Project, the City Council approved an Addendum to EIR No. 311, including Modified MMP No. 0067. Since the adoption of the original DRSP, proposed modifications to the DRSP have included eight amendments and fourteen adjustments.

The Disneyland Resort Project currently allows the following development:
 Theme Park District: up to 6,850,000 square feet of theme park uses, up to 1,025 hotel rooms, and up to 475,000 square feet of administration buildings with up to 2,300 associated parking spaces;
 Hotel District: up to 5,600 hotel rooms (including the 1,025 hotel rooms which have been constructed in the Theme Park District), up to 300,000 square feet of retail/restaurant uses, up to 9,930 parking spaces, and up to 200,000 square feet of meeting rooms/convention space;
 Theme Park District/Hotel District: up to 350,000 square feet of the theme park square footage allowed in the Theme Park District may be developed as a retail entertainment center in the Hotel District;
 Parking District, East Parking Area: up to 17,600 parking spaces, including up to 5,000 parking spaces that may be located in the Theme Park District;  Parking District, West Parking Area: up to 16,700 parking spaces; and  Future Expansion District: up to 5,100 parking spaces.

As of the date of the Notice of Preparation of this Draft Subsequent EIR, October 21, 2021, Disney has developed approximately 45 percent of the approved square footage for theme park uses, under the DRSP.

In September 1994, the City certified the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Master EIR No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) in support of the adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (Anaheim 1994b, 1994a). The Master EIR (Master EIR No. 313) evaluated impacts associated with the establishment and implementation of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) and created MMP No. 0085 in order to mitigate impacts associated with Specific Plan development. At the time the ARSP was adopted, the Specific Plan area encompassed approximately 549.5 acres. Two validation reports were prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of Master EIR No. 313. In December 2012, the City certified Supplemental EIR (SEIR) No. 340 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) along with the adoption of MMP No. 85C in support of the approval of Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Project. SEIR No. 340 reevaluated the environmental changes in and around the ARSP area since certification of Master EIR No. 313 in September 1994. SEIR No. 340 incorporated the relevant findings from Master EIR No. 313, particularly related to the loss of agricultural land, which was fully analyzed DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-2 Section 2.0 – Introduction
and identified as a significant and unavoidable impact in Master EIR No. 313. Because a statement of overriding considerations was adopted for this impact associated with Master EIR No. 313, and no new or additional impacts were found to occur with the Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Project, SEIR No. 340 incorporated the findings from Master EIR No. 313 for this topic.

For all other topics, SEIR No. 340 superseded the analyses and related findings from Master EIR No. 313. SEIR No. 340 analyzed the cumulative impacts associated with the entire Anaheim Resort and surrounding area, including the full build-out of the three specific plans within The Anaheim Resort. One validation report was prepared (2019) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of Master EIR No. 313 and SEIR No. 340. Since certification of Master EIR No. 313, proposed modifications to the ARSP have included 16 amendments and 13 adjustments, which included the expansion of the ARSP area to include 31.8 additional acres and increased the total acreage of the ARSP to 581.3 acres.

In 2021, to allow continued, long-term growth of The Disneyland Resort, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. (Disney) proposed DisneylandForward to allow the transfer of uses permitted under The Disneyland Resort Project to other areas of the DRSP and properties within the ARSP owned or leased by Disney or other subsidiaries of The Walt Disney Company (Disney ARSP Properties, and, collectively with Disney's properties in the DRSP, Disney Property or Disney Properties). This proposal did not request an increase in the amount of development square footage or hotel rooms allowed in the DRSP, or the number of hotel rooms allowed in the ARSP.

However, it included an increase of 4,376 theme park-related parking spaces in the ARSP. The proposal also requested future administrative review by the City of Disney's development projects on Disney Property.

This Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352 analyzes the impacts of the changes to The Disneyland Resort Project and the ARSP Project proposed by DisneylandForward and proposes a MMP to mitigate new or substantially more severe significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 311 or SEIR No. 340.

2.2 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
The topics below were identified in EIR No. 311 as significant and unavoidable adverse impacts.  Land Use-Related Plans and Policies. The loss of 80 acres of land designated prime agricultural was found to be significant and unavoidable. This included approximately 25 acres located northwest of Disneyland Drive and Cerritos Avenue (in the Hotel and Parking (West Parking Area) Districts) and 56 acres located southeast of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue. Prior to certification of EIR No. 311, the 56 acres located southeast of Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue were removed from the proposed Disneyland Resort Specific Plan and added to the proposed Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area. This was also identified as a significant cumulative impact.  Land Use Compatibility. The loss of prime agricultural land and impacts to property owners immediately adjacent to the Hotel District and West Parking Area along Walnut Street, and potentially the Future Expansion District were identified as significant unmitigated impacts. A significant and unavoidable cumulative impact was identified related to the juxtaposition of commercial and residential uses.  Transportation and Circulation. EIR No. 311 identified short-term, construction-related significant and unavoidable impacts related to transportation associated with site preparation and construction. Significant deficiencies in levels of service were found to potentially occur if future background traffic growth were not mitigated by project-specific improvements or other improvements if the Katella Avenue Smart Street project DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-3 Section 2.0 – Introduction
improvements were not implemented. Signi ficant and unavoidable cumulative impacts were identified related to transportation disruption.
 Air Quality. EIR No. 311 identified short-term, construction-related significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality associated with site preparation and construction. EIR No. 311 also identified that operational emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrous oxides (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO) would be significant after mitigation. Significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts were identified related to the emissions of ROG, NOx, CO, and particulate matter with a diameter of ten microns or less (PM10), as well as short-term, construction-related impacts.  Aesthetics. EIR No. 311 identified short-term, construction-related significant and unavoidable impacts related to visual resources and aesthetics associated with site preparation and construction. Significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts also were identified due to the proximity and size of potential buildings in the Hotel District, the Parking District West Parking Area and Future Expansion District close to residential areas.
 Solid Waste. Significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts were identified related to limited landfill capacity.
 Public Services – Schools. Significant and unavoidable indirect impacts were identified related to school enrollment due to over-capacity situations in both Anaheim Union High School District and Anaheim City School District.
 Utilities. Significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts were identified related to cumulative consumption of electricity and natural gas.

SEIR No. 340 identified the following potential impacts as significant and unavoidable adverse impacts.
 Aesthetics. Buildout of the C-R District was identified to have the potential to introduce structures which may create a significant shade and shadow impact on surrounding properties, which may result in a significant and unavoidable impact.  Air Quality. Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and long-term operational emissions of VOC, nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), respirable particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns (PM10), and fine particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 microns (PM 2.5) were projected to exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) CEQA significance thresholds and the impact was identified as significant and unavoidable. Local PM10 and PM2.5 emissions were also projected to exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds for short-term periods when excavation would occur near sensitive receptors; the impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Build out of the ARSP would result in long-term emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 that would exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds, resulting in a potentially cumulatively considerable contribut ion to existing occasional ozone, nitrogen dioxide (NO
2), PM10, and PM2.5 standard violations. Therefore, SEIR No. 340 identified a significant cumulative air quality impact.

Short-term exposure of persons to PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations exceeding the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds woul d occur during excavation near sensitive receptors; the impact was identified as significant and unavoidable.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-4 Section 2.0 – Introduction
SEIR No. 340 identified a significant and unavoidable impact related to conflict with the applicable air quality plan.
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Direct and indirect GHG emissions were identified as cumulatively considerable and would create a significant impact. GHG reductions would be achieved at the statewide level; however, impacts were identified to remain cumulatively considerable.
 Noise. Construction activities associated with future development within the ARSP were identified to have a significant and unavoidable impact to noise-sensitive receptors.  Transportation and Traffic. Within the Cities of Anaheim and Orange and within California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) facilities, SEIR No. 340 identified the potential to cause intersections, arterial segments, freeway ramp termini intersections, freeway ramps, freeway mainlines, and freeway weaving areas to operate at unacceptable levels of service (LOS). Because all needed roadway and intersection improvements within the City of Anaheim might not be feasible, traffic-related impacts in the City of Anaheim were identified as significant and unavoidable. The contribution to traffic volumes and levels of service at intersections in the City of Orange and at freeway ramps and mainlines were identified as significant and unavoidable since the City had no jurisdiction over the necessary improvements at these locations.
 Storm Water. SEIR No. 340 identified the need for implementation of new or modified storm water drainage facilities that would connect to existing utility systems provided by the City of Anaheim and other agencies. All new growth within the ARSP area would occur in compliance with mitigation measures provided in SEIR No. 340; however, it was identified that the City would have no control over the growth and storm water contributions of areas outside of its jurisdiction. Any addition of storm water to the regional storm water system was identified as cumulatively considerable when combined with potential storm water flow increases from surrounding jurisdictions. A potential cumulative impact was identified as significant and unavoidable if development in the surrounding jurisdictions were to occur without upgrades to the storm water infrastructure.

Other impacts were identified in EIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340; however, they were found to be less than significant or reduced to less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures. Extensive mitigation measures were adopted in conjunction with EIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 and, where appropriate, have been incorporated in this Draft Subsequent EIR.

2.3 THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT REPORT
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000–21189.70.10) requires that all public agencies in the State of California that regulate project activities that have the potential to affect the quality of the environment review the potential effects of the project and prevent or minimize such effects to the extent feasible prior to approval of the project. Such activity is reviewed and monitored through the CEQA process, as defined in CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000–15387). The CEQA process distinguishes varied levels of documentation and public review based on a project’s anticipated level of effect to the environment.

When it is determined through preliminary review that a project may likely have one or more significant effects on the environment, then an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared. The “scope” of the EIR may be determined through preparation of an Initial Study and a public scoping process. The EIR should consider both the potential project-specific (direct and DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-5 Section 2.0 – Introduction
indirect) and cumulative environmental impacts that could result from the implementation of the project.

When an EIR has been certified previously for a project, CEQA includes a strong presumption against requiring any further environmental review. Pursuant to Public Resources Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162:
(a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1) 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;
(2) 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; or
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

The City has determined the Project requires preparation of a Subsequent EIR as it has determined the Project’s changes to The Disneyland Resort Project and the ARSP Project may create new or substantially more severe significant impacts than those identified in EIR No. 311, Master EIR No. 313 and/or SEIR No. 340 (the Prior EIRs).

Pursuant to Section 15121 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the EIR is primarily an informational document intended to inform public agency decisionmakers and the public generally of the potentially significant environmental impacts of a project. The EIR should disclose all known potentially significant impacts (as identified through the Initial Study, public scoping process, and environmental analysis); should identify possible means to minimize or mitigate those effects; and should consider reasonable alternatives to the project that might further reduce significant impacts while still attaining the project objectives. The decisionmakers must consider the information in DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-6 Section 2.0 – Introduction
an EIR before taking action on a project. The EIR should contain substantial evidence to support the agency’s action on a project.

An EIR is prepared by or under the direction of the Lead Agency. The Lead Agency is the public agency with the primary responsibility for approving or carrying out a project. Responsible Agencies, which are public agencies that have a level of discretionary approval over some component of a project, may rely upon the EIR prepared by the Lead Agency (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15096).

2.4 PURPOSE OF THIS SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The primary purpose of this Draft Subsequent EIR is to reevaluate the analysis in EIR No. 311 for The Disneyland Resort Project and the analysis in Master EIR No. 313 and SEIR No. 340 for the ARSP Project to determine if the changes proposed to these projects by the DisneylandForward Project (Project) create new potentially significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of prior significant impacts. As further discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this Draft Subsequent EIR, the Project would allow the transfer of previously approved theme park, hotel and other retail, dining and entertainment uses, and parking to other areas of the DRSP and Disney ARSP Properties within the Project Site. For each environmental topic discussed in Section 5.0, this Draft Subsequent EIR analyzes how the impacts associated with the transfer of previously approved uses to other Disney Properties in the Project Site compare to those impacts discussed and analyzed in the Prior EIRs and determines if the Project would create a new or substantially more severe significant impact than determined in the Prior EIRs.

This Draft Subsequent EIR is prepared in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines.

The City is the Lead Agency under CEQA and is responsible for preparing the Draft Subsequent EIR. The determination that the City is the “lead agency” is made in accordance with Sections 15051 and 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which define the Lead Agency as the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project.

The City as Lead Agency has determined that the modifications proposed by the Project to The Disneyland Resort Project and the ARSP Project could require preparation of a Subsequent EIR under Public Resources Code Section 21166, subsections (a), (b) and (c) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, subsections (a)(1), (a)(2) or (a)(3). Therefore, as discussed further in the City’s Initial Study for the Project, included as Appendix A, the City has determined that a Subsequent EIR was appropriate to satisfy requirements contained in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 by fully disclosing new or substantially more severe significant impacts that would occur because of Project modifications to The Disneyland Resort Project and the ARSP Project and changes to existing conditions since certification of the prior EIR’s.

The City has prepared this Draft Subsequent EIR for the following purposes:
 to satisfy the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines;  to inform the general public, the local community, responsible and interested public agencies, and decisionmakers, including the City’s Planning Commission and City Council of the scope of the DisneylandForward Project and to communicate the potential environmental impacts, measures to mitigate those impacts, and alternatives to the DisneylandForward Project in accordance with CEQA supplemental review standards;  to enable the City Council to consider the environmental consequences of the DisneylandForward Project when deciding whether to approve the DisneylandForward Project; and
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-7 Section 2.0 – Introduction
 to serve as a source document for responsible agencies to issue permits and approvals, as required, for implementation of the DisneylandForward Project.

As described in CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, public agencies are charged with the duty to review the potential environmental impacts of a project and to avoid or substantially lessen those impacts where feasible. In satisfying this duty, a public agency has an obligation to balance a project’s significant impacts on the environment with its benefits, including economic, social, technological, legal, and other benefits. This Draft Subsequent EIR is an informational document, the purpose of which is to identify the potentially new or substantially more severe significant impacts of the DisneylandForward Project on the environment and to indicate the manner in which those potentially significant impacts can be avoi ded or significantly lessened, to identify any significant and unavoidable adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated, and to identify reasonable and feasible alternatives to the DisneylandForward Project that would eliminate any significant adverse environmental impacts or reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.

The City as Lead Agency is responsible for processing and approving the DisneylandForward Project and associated discretionary actions, and must consider the information in this Draft Subsequent EIR along with other information that may be presented during the CEQA process in its decisionmaking process. Other public agencies (i.e., responsible and trustee agencies) may also use this Draft Subsequent EIR in their decisionmaking or permitting processes. The discretionary actions involved in the implementation of the DisneylandForward Project are described in Section 3.7, Discretionary Actions, of this Draft Subsequent EIR.

Upon certification of the Final Subsequent EIR, the City Council will consider whether to approve the DisneylandForward Project and associated discretionary actions. As a part of its consideration for approval of the DisneylandForward Project and associated actions, the City Council must approve Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for any significant and unavoidable impacts of the DisneylandForward Project and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring Program for the DisneylandForward Project.

2.5 SCOPE OF THIS DRAFT SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT At the onset of the CEQA process, the City determined that a Subsequent EIR would be required for the Project and an Initial Study was prepared to focus the required analysis to be carried through to the Subsequent EIR. Through the Initial Study, the City determined that no new or substantially more severe significant impacts than those disclosed in the Prior EIRs or no impact would occur related to the following topics, and that no further review would be conducted in the Subsequent EIR:

Aesthetics:

Question a: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Question b: Would the project 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? Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Question a: Would the project 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?
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-8 Section 2.0 – Introduction
Question b: Would the project conflict with existi ng zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Question c: Would the project conflict with existi ng 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))? Question d: Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Question e: Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Biological Resources
Question a: Would the project 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? Question b: Would the project 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 US Fish and Wildlife Service?
Question c: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Question e: Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Question f: Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
Cultural Resources
Question c: Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Geology and Soils
Question a: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
(iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-9 Section 2.0 – Introduction
Question a: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
(iv) Landslides?
Question c: Would the project 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? Question e: Would the project 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 wastewater?
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Question c: Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Question 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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? Question f: Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Question g: Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? Hydrology and Water Quality
Question c: Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
(iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
Question d: Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Land Use and Planning
Question a: Would the project physically divide an established community? Mineral Resources
Question a: Would the project 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? DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-10 Section 2.0 – Introduction
Question b: Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Noise
Question c: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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?
Population and Housing
Question b: Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Recreation
Question a: Would the project 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?
Question b: Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Wildfire
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Question a: Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Question b: Would the project due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? Question c: Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
Question d: Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Implementation of the Project could have potentially new or substantially more severe significant impacts for each of the remaining topical env ironmental issues and/or threshold questions identified in the environmental checklist included in Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines.

These topics are analyzed in the Draft Subsequent EIR. The content of the Draft Subsequent EIR was further refined based upon comments received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP), and comments received at the public sc oping meeting held by the City. NOP comments DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-11 Section 2.0 – Introduction
and comments received at the scoping meeting are discussed below and included as Appendix A to the Draft Subsequent EIR.

2.6 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The following reports and/or studies are hereby incorporated by reference, along with the referenced data and information:
 Disneyland Resort Specific Plan:
o The Disneyland Resort Final Environmental Impact Report No. 311, certified by the City in 1993 along with the adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0067.

EIR No 311 analyzed the environmental impacts of The Disneyland Resort Project, including the DRSP; and
o The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report No. 311 Addendum No. 1 and Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program 0067, approved by the City in 1996, which analyzed environmental impacts associated with the continued buildout of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, including changes that occurred since EIR No. 311 was certified in 1993.
 Anaheim Resort Specific Plan:
o The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Final Master EIR No. 313 with Addendum, certified by the City in 1994, along with the adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85; and
o The Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 340 for Amendment No. 14 to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, certified by the City in 2012 along with the adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C. SEIR No 340 analyzed the environmental impacts associated with the continued buildout of the ARSP Project, including changes that occurred since EIR No. 313 was certified in 1994.

2.7 PUBLIC REVIEW PROCESS
In compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has taken steps to provide opportunities for the public and other public agencies to participate in the environmental review process (as discussed below) and/or to provide input on the Project and scope of this Draft Subsequent EIR.

2.8 NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND INITIAL STUDY
The City distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) on October 21, 2021, for a 30-day review to 13,998 interested agencies, organizations, and individuals. In addition to a letter from the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) identifying that the NOP was transmitted to State agencies, a total of 26 agencies and other interested parties responded to the NOP. The NOP and NOP comments are included in Appendix A and are on file at the City’s Planning and Building Department (see address in Section 2.8.2 below). Table 2-1 includes a summary of the NOP comments received. The table also includes a column that identifies which section(s) of this Draft Subsequent EIR address the individual comments.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-12 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)
State Agencies
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) October 21, 2021
Letter from OPR to State agencies transmitting
the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and identifying
the official 30-day public review period.

N/A1
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), District 12 November 30, 2021
Transportation Planning:
 Caltrans will still require sufficient time to
review environmental documents for
projects that potent ially have impacts on
the State Highway System; review period
is set by CEQA.
 Caltrans encourages the evaluation of
potential Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) strategies and
Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)
applications in order to better manage the
transportation network. For additional
TDM options, please refer to the Federal
Highway Administration’s Integrating
Demand Management into the
Transportation Planning Process.

Traffic Operations:
 Please review Caltrans' Vehicle Miles
Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact
Study Guide to analyze project/plan
impact or effect on the State Highway
System.

Encroachment Permit
 Any project work proposed in the vicinity of
the State Right-of-Way (ROW) would
require an encroachment permit and all
environmental concerns must be
adequately addressed. If the
environmental documentation for the
project does not meet Caltrans’s
Section 5.14,
Transportation

1 “N/A” indicates the comment received in response to the NOP does not concern an environmental issue considered under CEQA, bu t the comment is noted and included in the administrative record for review and consideration by the decisionmakers.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-13 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)
requirements for work done within State
ROW, additional documentation would be
required before approval of the
encroachment permit. Please coordinate
with Caltrans to meet requirements for any
work within or near State ROW. California Native American Heritage Commission October 26, 2021
 An analysis of Tribal Cultural Resources is
required as a separate category of cultural
resources.
 Consultation with California Native
American tribes that are traditionally and
culturally affiliated with the geographic
area of the project is recommended; and a
summary of the requirements of Assembly
Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18, which
address Native American tribal
consultation, is provided.
 Recommendations for cultural resources
assessments are provided.

Section 5.4, Cultural
Resources
Section 5.15, Tribal
Cultural Resources
Local Agencies
City of Irvine November 23,
2021  The City has no comments. N/A
Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) – Dan Phu November 29, 2021
 Level of Service (LOS) analysis to monitor
Congestion Management Program (CMP)
Highway System (HS) performance, per
the CMP Traffic Impact Analysis
Requirements, shall be submitted to
OCTA separately from the CEQA
document.
 Harbor Boulevard (Blvd) and Katella
Avenue (Ave) are part of the CMPHS.

Additionally, Harbor Blvd/Katella Ave,
Harbor Blvd/Intersta te-5 (I-5) Ramps
(NB/SB), and Anaheim Blvd-I-5 NB
Ramps/Katella Ave intersections are CMP
intersections. These roadways and
Section 5.14,
Transportation

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-14 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)
intersections should be analyzed as such
for any potential traffic impacts consistent
with the Orange County CMP.
 For any potential changes to the
Circulation Element in relation to arterials
on the Master Plan of Arterial Highways
(MPAH), initiate a MPAH amendment
request with OCTA, coordinate with
impacted agencies, and conduct a traffic
analysis using an OCTA certified model.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) November 9, 2021
 Air quality (construction-related,
operation-related, indirect sources) and
greenhouse gas (GHG) emission impacts
should be addressed and mitigation
measures identified for significant
impacts.
 Emissions from the overlapping
construction and operational activities
should be combined and compared to
South Coast AQMD’s regional air quality
CEQA operational thresholds to determine
the level of significance.
 If the project generates diesel emissions
from long-term construction or attracts
diesel-fueled vehicular trips, especially
heavy-duty diesel-fueled vehicles, it is
recommended that the Lead Agency
perform a mobile source health risk
assessment.
 SCAQMD should be identified as a
responsible agency if the project requires
a permit from SCAQMD.
 Sources of information are provided
related to the air quality and GHG
analyses to be used to meet its
requirements and related to mitigation
measures to be considered.

Section 5.2, Air
Quality
Section 5.7,
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Section 5.8, Hazards
and Hazardous
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-15 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) November 23, 2021
 SCAG requests that the consistency of the
proposed project with the 2020-2045
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS or
Connect SoCal) goals be addressed, and
RTP/SCS strategies provide guidance for
considering the project in the context of
these goals.
 The most recently adopted RTP/SCS
growth forecasts should be used.
 SCAG recommends that the 2020
RTP/SCS Final Program EIR Mitigation
Measures be used for guidance, as
appropriate.

Section 5.10, Land
Use and Planning
Section 5.12, Public
Services
Interested Parties
Jesse Ben-Ron November 8,
2021  Supports the DisneylandForward Project. N/A
Jennifer Billmire
November 5,
2021  Concern over impact on neighborhood
parking; specifically, streets that do not
currently have permit parking.

Section 3.0, Project
Description
Section 5.14,
Transportation
Karen DeSoicio
November 12,
2021
 Does not support the DisneylandForward
Project. Concern over blocking Anaheim
Boulevard creating a longer commute for
residences to travel north.

Section 5.14,
Transportation
Jeremiah Gillman
October 23,
2021
 Concern that expansion would cause
limitation to pedestrian access of
Downtown Disney from the Walnut and
Magic Way entrance.

Section 5.14,
Transportation
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-16 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)
Amanda Griffiths October 27,
2021
Expressed concerns with the
DisneylandForward Project regarding:
 Future landscaping and subsequent
maintenance based on current lack of care
of landscaping along Walnut Street and
the pathway to the hotel.
 Pedestrian access for the public to the
Disneyland Hotel and Downtown Disney
from Magic Way and Walnut Street without
using the parking structure.
 Height restrictions increase that could
potentially block views of the Disneyland
fireworks.

Section 3.0, Project
Description
Section 5.1,
Aesthetics
Section 5.14,
Transportation
Robert (Red) Harbin
November 29,
2021
 Request being added to the mailing list for
all information about the
DisneylandForward Project. Requests a
phone call from the City.

N/A
Robert Harbin November 30,
2021
 Concerned about maintaining the integrity
of Section 18.114. 050.060 (and all
associated sections) of the Anaheim
Municipal Code which specifically
provides:
“Adequate provision shall be made for the safe
and orderly circulation of both pedestrian and
vehicular traffic between the proposed site and
all streets and highways and between
coordinated facilities, accessways or parking
areas on adjacent sites. The proposed
development shall not limit or adversely affect
the growth and development of adjoining lands
or the general area in which it is proposed to be
located.”
 Additionally, concerns highlighted in a
previous letter (dated January 2, 2017 to
David Belmer, Planning Director of the
City of Anaheim regarding the Disneyland
Section 3.0, Project
Description
Section 5.2, Air
Quality
Section 5.10, Land
Use and Planning
Section 5.11, Noise
Section 5.14,
Transportation
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-17 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)
Resort Eastern Gateway Project) are
relevant to the proposed Project and
request they be considered as part of the
process.

Margo Hobkirk
November 5,
2021
 Concern over how the proposed Project
would affect her timeshare at Peacock
Suites.

N/A
Luciralia Ibarra
November 8,
2021
 Interested in additional information
regarding the proposed improvements to
the right-of-way, the extent of construction,
and anticipated construction
commencement and conclusion dates
under the proposed EIR. Specifically, as it
may affect property at, and adjacent to,
2132 S. Harbor Boulevard.

Section 3.0, Project
Description

Christian Mutual Med Aid – Connie Kim October 29,
2021
 Interested in how the Project will affect
Christian Mutual Med-Aid in more detail.

N/A
Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) – Diana Kotler November 4, 2021
 ATN is in support of the
DisneylandForward Project.

N/A
Jay Kremer
October 26,
2021
 Would the City of Anaheim use eminent
domain to acquire properties for the
DisneylandForward Project?
Section 3.0, Project
Description

Peter Lessick
November 4,
2021
 Proposes a free mall as part of Disneyland
with suggestions on the types of
businesses to have at the mall.

N/A
Pablo Loblatos
October 25,
2021
 Interested in further information on how
the Project would impact the property at
1169 W Chateau Ave.

N/A
Rita Matchet
unknown
 Concern over current traffic, noise, street
trash, and dust on West Street.
 Objects to the Project.

Section 5.2, Air
Quality
Section 5.11, Noise
Section 5.14,
Transportation
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-18 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)
Frances Noteboom November 1,
2021
 Good communication from the Disney
Corporation regarding the proposed
Disneyland Forward Projects.

N/A
Wincome Hospitality – Paul Sanford November 29,
2021
Request clarification regarding how the
DisneylandForward Project would affect traffic
and parking. Questions and requests outlined
in the letter are in regard to the following areas:

Understanding is that Convention Way was
previously constructed to connect with the I-5
Freeway and Gene Autry exit.
 Is the previous construction connecting
the Convention Way and the I-5 Freeway
being abandoned in this proposal? If so,
provide an updated traffic study that
addresses these proposed changes.
 Will the Draft (EIR) illustrate how the traffic
will be rerouted throughout the Anaheim
Resort Area?
Disney Way, from I-5 Freeway to Harbor
Boulevard (1700 S. Harbor Boulevard
approved project) currently is a 6-lane road:
 Provide supporting documents outlining
the downsizing of lanes impacting Disney
Way.
 Request vehicular access into the eastern
property line of 1700 S. Harbor Boulevard
utilizing the existing turn lane to the
Garden Walk parking structure.
 How does Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352
support and ensure that the U-turn
currently located at Disney Way and
Harbor Boulevard remains in place?
 How is the Draft Subsequent EIR No 352
addressing Disney Way pedestrian foot
traffic for new hotels and approved
developments East of Harbor Boulevard?
Section 3.0, Project
Description
Section 5.10, Land
Use and Planning
Section 5.14,
Transportation
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-19 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)

 When will we have access to detailed
drawings how the proposed changes to
Disney Way will compare to the current
conditions?
Disneyland Drive was previously designed and
approved to be a 6-lane road:
 Interested in how the proposed changes
outlined in Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352
will impact Disneyland Drive.
 Can the City of Anaheim provide detailed
documents showing how the privatization
of Disneyland Drive will impact vehicular
and pedestrian traffic to the Disneyland
Resort Theme Parks compared to the
current utilization?
 Request that the privatization of
Disneyland Drive should be conditioned
upon installing a fully operational
pedestrian gate providing access to the
Disneyland Resort Theme Parks from
Hotels located south of Katella Avenue.
 Interested in a detailed traffic study
showing the effects of the privatization of
Disneyland Drive.

Request the City of Anaheim reevaluate
requirements for new full-service hotel
developments located with the Anaheim
Resort.
 Request that parking requirement for new
full-service hotels and developments
should be reduced.
 Can the City further study utilizing internal
transfers of parking count ratio in full-
service developments

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-20 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)
Request the City of Anaheim reconsider and
reevaluate the traffic, zoning, and permitted
uses for 888 S. Disneyland Drive.
 Interested in how the proposed
changes outlined in Draft
Subsequent EIR No. 352 will impact
pedestrian foot traffic heading north
and south on Disneyland Drive, west
and east on Ball Road, and north of
Ball Road.
 Request that the City consider a right
turn lane onto Disneyland Drive from
Westbound Ball Road.
 Stated that t he City’s codes,
restrictive zoning, and permitted
uses are adversely affecting their
leasing efforts with new prospective
tenants.
 Request that the City update current
codes to provide more flexibility,
including allowing additional
eyebrow signage for office buildings
at this site.

Jeremy Schnaible
November 18,
2021
 Request that permission not be given to
move forward on the Project.

N/A
Neil Storer
October 23,
2021
 Interested in further information on how
the Project would impact daily life at
Chapman Avenue and Haster Street.

Section 5.14,
Transportation
Trangdai and Olivier Glassey-Tranguyen
October 23,
2021
 Objection to the DisneylandForward
Project, which would create additional
environmental, social, and logistical
problems for local residents.

N/A
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-21 Section 2.0 – Introduction
TABLE 2-1

NOTICE OF PREPARATION COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED

Agency Date Comments
Addressed in
Section(s)
Joshua Wang
November 4,
2021
 Concern over the closure of Disney(land)
Drive intersection with Katella Avenue.
 Requests that Disneyland and the City of
Anaheim open a park entrance gate on
Katella Avenue for the public to enter the
parks.

Section 5.14,
Transportation

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-22 Section 2.0 – Introduction

2.8.1 PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL IM PACT REPORT SCOPING MEETING On November 4, 2021, the City held a public scoping meeting at the Downtown Anaheim Community Center Assembly Hall to describe the Project, answer questions, and seek public input regarding the proposed scope of the Draft Subsequent EIR analysis. Notice of the scoping meeting was sent to interested agencies, organizations, and individuals along with a copy of the NOP. The meeting was attended by 28 individuals including representatives from the City and local business owners. Only one written comment was received addressing the environmental analysis in the Draft Subsequent EIR which is summarized below, and the section of the Subsequent EIR where the issue is addressed is identified in parentheses.  Traffic. Concern was expressed regarding Anaheim Resort traffic conditions during periods of exceptional guest traffic. (Section 5.14)

2.8.2 PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD
As required by Section 15085(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, as soon as the Draft Subsequent EIR is completed, a notice of completion (NOC) will be filed with the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). The NOC will also be filed with the Orange County Clerk-Recorder.

As specified in Section 15087 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City will provide Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft Subsequent EIR at the same time that the NOC is filed with OPR.

The Draft Subsequent EIR is being distributed to numerous public agencies and other interested parties for review and comment. The following agencies will be contacted:
 Responsible agencies, including: Caltrans District 12; Orange County Sanitation District; Orange County Flood Control District; Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board; South Coast Air Quality Management District; Orange County Transportation Authority; and
 Trustee agencies, including: California Department of Fish and Wildlife South Coast Region; and
 Other public agencies, including: Orange County Waste and Recycling; Orange County Airport Land Use Commission; Western Riverside Council of Governments; Orange County Health Care Agency; County of Orange Harbors, Beaches, and Parks; Orange County Public Works; Department of Health and Humans Services; Southern California Association of Governments; California Air Resources Board; California Highway Patrol; California Geological Survey; Caltrans Division of Aeronautics; Cleveland National Forest; University of California, Irvine; University of California, Berkeley; California Public Utilities Commission; State Board of Forestry and Fire Prevention; Department of Toxic Substances Control; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

In addition, the NOA shall be mailed to the last known name and address of all organizations and individuals who have previously requested such notice in writing.

Finally, the City will provide notice via publication at least one time in a newspaper of general circulation; posting of notice off-site; and/or direct mailing to owners and occupants of parcels that are adjacent to the Project Site.

The Draft Subsequent EIR is available on the City website at the following web address:
www.anaheim.net/876/Environmental-Documents
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-23 Section 2.0 – Introduction
The Draft Subsequent EIR is also available for review in-person at the following locations:

Anaheim Planning & Building Department
200 S. Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
Anaheim Central Library
500 W. Broadway
Anaheim, CA 92805
Euclid Branch Library
1340 S. Euclid Street
Anaheim, CA 92802
Ponderosa Joint Use Branch Library
240 E. Orangewood Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92802
Comments from all agencies and individuals on the Draft Subsequent EIR will be accepted during the 45-day public review period, which opens on September 14, 2023, and closes on October 30, 2023. All comments on this Draft Subsequent EIR should be sent to:

Elaine Thienprasiddhi, Senior Planner
Anaheim Planning & Building Department
200 S. Anaheim Boulevard, MS 162
Anaheim, CA 92805
[email protected]
Following the close of the public review period, the City will prepare a Final Subsequent EIR that will incorporate comments received, written responses to comments received during the comment period, and the Draft Subsequent EIR along with any changes to the Draft Subsequent EIR that result from the comments received. Responses to comments submitted on the Draft Subsequent EIR by public agencies will be provided to those agencies at least ten days prior to final action on the DisneylandForward Project. The City Council will make findings regarding the extent and nature of the impacts, as described in the Final Subsequent EIR. The City Council must certify the Final Subsequent EIR prior to making a decision to approve the DisneylandForward Project.

Public input is encouraged at all public hearings.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

2-24 Section 2.0 – Introduction
This page intentionally left blank
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-1 Section 3.0 – Project Description
SECTION 3.0

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 INTRODUCTION
To allow continued, long-term growth of The Disneyland® Resort, Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. (Disney) proposes DisneylandForward (Project), which would allow the transfer of uses permitted under The Disneyland Resort Project to other areas of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (DRSP) and properties within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 (ARSP) owned or leased by Disney or other subsidiaries of The Walt Disney Company (Disney ARSP Properties, and, collectively with Disney’s proper ties in the DRSP, Disney Property or Disney Properties). These areas are or will be considered to be part of The Disneyland Resort Project as modified by the DisneylandForward Project. Project details are described in more detail in Section 3.5, Project Description, below.

The Project would not increase the amount of development square footage or hotel rooms currently allowed in the DRSP and analyzed in Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 311, which the City of Anaheim (City) certified in 1993, or the number of hotel rooms currently allowed in the ARSP and analyzed in Supplemental Environmental Impact Report No. 340, which the City certified in 2012. However, the Project would permit an increase of 4,376 theme park-related parking spaces in the ARSP. The Project also would provide for future administrative review by the City of Disney’s development projects on Disney Properties, which would rely on this Subsequent Environmental Impact Report in accordance with CEQA standards.

3.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Project Location
The Project Site is located entirely within the City in Orange County, California, within an area known as The Anaheim Resort®, a 1,078-acre portion of the City especially designated by the City's General Plan for Commercial Recreation land uses and which is intended to provide for tourist and entertainment-related industries, such as theme parks, hotels, tourist-oriented retail, movie theaters, and other visitor-serving facilities. The Anaheim Resort is located 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles, seven miles northwest of Santa Ana, and just north of Garden Grove in central Orange County. As shown in Exhibit 3-1, Regional Location Map, and Exhibit 3-2, Local Vicinity and Existing Specific Plan Designations, the Project Site is located generally west of the U.S. Interstate 5 corridor, south of Vermont Avenue, east of Walnut Street, and north of Chapman Avenue within the City. The Anaheim Resort includes the following three specific plan areas: DRSP (489.7 acres), ARSP (581.3 acres) and Hotel Circle Specific Plan No. 93-1 (HCSP) (6.8 acres).

The Project Site is located within areas regulated by the DRSP and the ARSP. Exhibit 3-2, Local Vicinity and Existing Specific Plan Designations, shows the Project Site relative to the boundaries of The Anaheim Resort, ARSP, DRSP and HCSP. Interstate 5 provides regional access to the Regional Location Map
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Exhibit 3-1

C A M P

P E N D L E T O N

CLEVELAND
Lake
Mathews

P A C I F I C

O C E A N
San Gabriel
Reservoir

NATIONAL
FOREST
Project Location
San Bernardino
Riverside
ST72
Santa
§¨105
§¨5
§¨710
§¨110
§¨605
§¨5
§¨210
§¨15
§¨10
ST1 ST73
ST22
ST2
ST19
ST241
ST74
ST90
ST261
ST142
ST39
ST134
ST110
ST60
ST213
ST71
ST55
ST133
ST57
ST710
ST241
ST91
Riverside
San Diego
Los Angeles
Orange
Anaheim
Viejo
Beach
Rancho
Rancho
Corona
Downey
Irvine
Carson
Ontario
Mission
San Juan
Whittier
Lakewood
Pasadena
Glendale
Riverside
Cucamonga
Margarita
Santa Ana
Hawthorne
Capistrano
Huntington Costa Mesa
Buena Park
Seal Beach
Long Beach
Westminster
Yorba Linda
West Covina
San Clemente
Laguna Beach
7 0 73.5
Miles²
City of Anaheim
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
Katella Ave
Disney Way
Manchester Ave
Clementine St
Gene Autry WayConvention Way
Disneyland Drive
Magic Way
South St
Vermont Ave
East St
Haster St
West St
Orangewood Ave
Ninth St
Walnut St
§¨5
The City Dr
HarborBlvd
Chapman Ave
Anaheim Blvd
Ball Rd
Anaheim Way
D:\Projects\3WDI\000400\MXD\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_LV_Existing_SP_Designations_20230302.mxd ²
Local Vicinity and Existing Specific Plan Designations Exhibit 3-2 2,000 0 2,0001,000
Feet
Project Site
! ! Designated for Future Extension in General Plan Circulation Element Specific Plan Areas
Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP92-1)
Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2)
Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP93-1)
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
(Rev: 8-28-2023 JMC) R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Graphics\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_LV_Existing_SP_Designations.pdf DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-2 Section 3.0 – Project Description
Project Site; Harbor Boulevard, Katella Avenue, and Disneyland Drive provide local access. An aerial photograph of the Project Site is shown on Exhibit 3-3, Aerial Photograph.

As shown on Exhibit 3-4, DRSP and Disney ARSP Properties, the Project Site encompasses The Disneyland Resort, including the existing Theme Park, Hotel, Parking and Future Expansion Districts, shown in Exhibit 3-5, Current Development Districts, and the Disney ARSP Properties, which are listed below:
 1515 S. Manchester Avenue (currently used as the Manchester Cast Member 1 Lot);
 1585 S. Manchester Avenue (currently occupied by an office building and also used as the Manchester Cast Member Lot);
 1530 S. Harbor Boulevard (currently used as the Manchester Cast Member Lot);  1900 S. Harbor Boulevard (currently used as the Toy Story Parking Lot);  333 W. Ball Road (currently used as the Harbor Cast Member Lot); and  1717 S. Disneyland Drive (Paradise Pier Hotel).

To the extent the Project would update The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program, The Anaheim Resort Identity Program and the Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map, the Project Site includes the entire Anaheim Resort (inclusive of the ARSP, DRSP, and HCSP). The Project Site also includes areas identified in the General Plan as planned extensions of Gene Autry Way between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street and of Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and Orangewood Avenue, portions of which are outside The Anaheim Resort.

Environmental Setting
Existing land uses within the area governed by the DRSP consist of Disneyland, Downtown Disney, Disney California Adventure Park, Disney’s Grand Californian Hotel & Spa, Disneyland Hotel, Disney administration offices, back-of-house uses, and parking lots/structures owned or controlled by Disney as well as hotels, motels, retail centers, rental car offices, and convenience stores owned by third parties.

Existing land uses within the Disney ARSP Properties are surface parking lots, an office building, and the Paradise Pier Hotel and associated parking structure. Existing land uses in the ARSP include the Anaheim Convention Center, as well as hotel, motel, retail, restaurant, service station, office, parking lot/structure, single-family residential, rental car offices, event center/banquet hall, vacant lands, RV park uses, and mobile home sites. The ARSP also includes a post office, Orange Grove Elementary, and a vocational school.

The zoning designation for the planned extension of Gene Autry Way west of Haster Street is within an existing apartment complex, which is located outside of The Anaheim Resort and designated on the General Plan and zoned for multiple-family residential uses.

1 Cast Member is a term used by Disney for an employee of The Disneyland Resort. !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!
W Katella Ave
Disney Way
Manchester Ave
Clementine St
Gene Autry WayConvention Way
Disneyland Drive
Magic Way
East St
Haster St
West St
Orangewood Ave
Ninth St
Walnut St
Cerritos Ave
Chapman Ave
Harbor Blvd
Anaheim Blvd E Katella Ave
S Walnut St
W Ball Rd
Vermont Ave
Manchester Ave
§¨5
H
arb
or
B
lvd
Chapman Ave
Anaheim Blvd
E Ball Rd
Anaheim Way
D:\Projects\3WDI\000400\MXD\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Aerial_20230302.mxd ²
Aerial Photograph Exhibit 3-3
1,500 0 1,500750
Feet
Project Site
! !
Designated for Future Extension in General
Plan Circulation Element
Specific Plan Areas
Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP92-1)
Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2)
Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP93-1)
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
(Rev: 8-18-2023 JMC) R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Graphics\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Aerial.pdf Aerial Source: City of Anaheim Open Data, 2021
Exhibit 3-4
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
DRSP and Disney ARSP Properties

City of
Orange
Gene Autry Way
Manchester
Ave
C
lementine St
Zeyn
St

CITY BOUNDARY
Wilkin Way
Walnut St
We
st Pl
Ox
Rd
Anaheim B
lvd
West St
Disney Way
Harbor
Blvd
Disn
eyland Dr
Magic Way
Cast
P
l
East
Parking
Area
West
Parking
Area
City of
Anaheim
City of
Anaheim
City of
Garden Grove
City of
Orange
Orangewood Ave
Vermont Ave
Anaheim B
lvd
Chapman Ave
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave

CITY BOUNDARY

CITY BOUNDARY
West St
Haster St
Ball Rd Ball Rd
Walnut St
9th St
§¨¦5
Manches
ter Ave
Convention Way
CA Adventure
Theme Park
Disneyland
Theme Park
Anaheim
Convention
Center

HARBOR CAST MEMBER LOT
333 West Ball Rd

MANCHESTER CAST MEMBER LOT
1530 South Harbor Blvd
1515 South Manchester Ave
1585 South Manchester Ave

TOY STORY PARKING LOT
1900 South Harbor Blvd

PARADISE PIER HOTEL
1717 South Disneyland Dr
0 750 1,500
Feet
City Boundary
Notes/SourcesLEGEND
°
The Anaheim Resort
Boundary
The Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan Boundary
City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022Disney ARSP Properties
yp
Designated for Future
Extension in General
Plan Circulation Element
Exhibit 3-5
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Current Development Districts
(09/08/2023 JMC) R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Graphics\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Current_Dev_Districts.pdf

City of
Orange
Gene Autry Way
Manchester
Ave
Clemen
tine S
t
Zeyn
St

CITY BOUNDARY
Wilkin Way
Walnu
t S
t
West
Pl
Ox
Rd
Anaheim B
lvd
Katella Ave
West St
Disney Way
Haster St
Harb
or B
lvd
Disneyland
Dr
Magic Way
Cast
Pl
East
Parking
Area

PARKING

DISTRICT

THEME PARK

DISTRICT

PARKING

DISTRICT

FUTURE EXPANSION

DISTRICT
West
Parking
Area
City of
Anaheim
City of
Anaheim
City of
Garden Grove
City of
Orange
Orangewood Ave
Vermont Ave
Ana
heim Blvd
Chapman Ave
Cerritos Ave
Cerritos Ave

CITY BOUNDARY

CITY BOUNDARY
West St
Haster St
Ball Rd
Walnu
t St
9th St
§¨¦5
Man
chester
Ave
HOTEL

DISTRICT
Convention Way
CA Adventure
Theme Park
Disneyland
Theme Park
C-R

DISTRICT
C-R

DISTRICT
Anaheim
Convention
Center

DISTRICT A
0 750 1,500
Feet
City Boundary
Notes/SourcesLEGEND
°

DRSP DISTRICTS
The Anaheim Resort
Boundary
The Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan Boundary
C-R District
Theme Park District
Parking District
Hotel District
Future Expansion District

DISNEY ARSP PROPERTIES
City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022
District A
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-3 Section 3.0 – Project Description

3.3 PROJECT BACKGROUND
City of Anaheim General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements The City of Anaheim General Plan, described in more detail in Section 5.10, Land Use and Planning, of this Subsequent EIR, designates The Anaheim Resort for Commercial Recreation land uses, which is intended to provide for tourist and entertainment-related industries, such as theme parks, hotels, tourist-oriented retail, movie theaters, and other visitor-serving facilities. The Commercial Recreation designation is implemented by the DRSP, ARSP and HCSP. The General Plan Land Use Element also defines the maximum development activity for these Specific Plan areas in Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions For Specific Areas Of The City, and excerpted as Table 3-1, General Plan Density Provisions for DRSP, ARSP, and HCSP.

TABLE 3-1

GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR DRSP, ARSP, AND HCSP Location
General Plan
Land Use
Designations Permitted Density
The Disneyland
Resort Specific
Plan (SP 92-1)
Area
Commercial
Recreation
The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan provides for the development of an approximate 489.7-acre international mu lti-day vacation designation resort including ongoing modifications to the Disneyland theme park, the development of a new theme park, additional hotels and entertainment areas, administrative office facilities, new public and private parking facilities, and an internal transportation system. This development is withi n five planning Districts (Theme Park, Hotel, Parking, Future Expansion and District A) and a C-R Overlay, which allows development within the Overlay to either be consistent with the underlying Resort District or subject to the same land uses as in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 Zone.

The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan also identifies maximum development density designations for hotel/motel development in the Hotel District (up to 5,600 hotel rooms for the entire District with up to 1,000 hotel rooms transferable to the Theme Park District), in District A (the maximum number of units permitted would be 75 hotel/motel rooms per gross acre or 75 hotel/motel rooms per parcel existing on June 29, 1993, whichever is greater) and the C- R Overlay (the maximum number of units permitted on a parcel would be the following: 1) for parcels designated Lo w Density – up to 50 hotel rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater; and 2) for parcels designated Medium Density – up to 75 hotel rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater; provided that for those par cels that are developed with hotel/motel rooms which exceeded the maximum density designation, the number of rooms existing on the date of adoption of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Ordinance may be rebuilt or modified at their existing density.) It should be noted that accessory uses may be developed as well as other visitor-serving commercial/retail and restaurant uses along with these hotel/motel uses.

The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan also provides for the development of the Anaheim GardenWalk project pursuant to the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay at the following density and subject to t he approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 4078, as amended, to permit the following: up to 590,265 square feet of specialty retail, restaurants, and entertainment uses, including movie theaters; 1,628 hotel rooms/suites (including up to 500 vacation ownership units) and 278,817 square feet of hotel accessory uses; a transportation center, and 4,800 parking spaces. The Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay encompasses District A and the portion of the Parking District (East Parking Area)/CR Overlay south of Disney Way.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-4 Section 3.0 – Project Description
TABLE 3-1

GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR DRSP, ARSP, AND HCSP Location
General Plan
Land Use
Designations Permitted Density
The Anaheim
Resort Specific
Plan (SP 92-2)
Area
Commercial
Recreation
The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) provides for the development of approximately 581.3 acres within The Anaheim Resort. The ARSP is divided into two development areas. Development Area No. 1 is referred to as the C- R (Commercial Recreation) District which allows for hotels, motels, convention and conference facilities, as well as restaurants, retail shops and entertainment facilities. Development Area No. 2 is referred to as the PR (Public Recreation) District which encompasses the Anaheim Convention Center and associated parking facilities and provides for the orde rly use of City-owned property as well as the existing Anaheim Hilton Hotel.

The C-R District includes two overlays. The Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay, which encompasses existing mobilehome parks within the C-R District, provides development standards for mobilehome parks and regulations and procedures to mitigate relocation concerns and adverse effects of displacement upon mobilehome owners when a park is converted to another land use. The Anaheim Resort Resident ial Overlay, which applies to focused areas of the Specific Plan, provides fo r the incorporation of residential uses into hotel developments when such uses are fully integrated into a minimum 300-room full-service hotel.

The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan also identifies maximum development density designations in the C-R Distric t. These designations are based upon hotel/motel development and allow up to 20% of each hotel/motel project gross square footage, excluding parking facilit ies, to be developed with integrated (i.e., included within the main hotel/motel complex) accessory uses. These accessory uses will reduce the other wise maximum permitted hotel/motel density at the rate of one hotel/motel room per six hundred (600) gross square feet of accessory use. For properties proposed to be developed with permitted and conditionally permitted uses other than hotels/motels with accessory uses, the traffic generation characteristics of said uses shall not exceed those associated with the otherwise permitted hotel/motel (including accessory uses) density as determined by the City Tra ffic and Transportation Manager prior to Final Site Plan review and approval. The maximum development density for each of the designations are as follows:
• Low Density: up to 50 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater;
• Low-Medium Density: up to 75 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater;
• Low-Medium Density (Modified): up to 252 rooms and 75,593 square feet of accessory uses;
• Medium Density: up to 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater;
• Medium Density (Modified): up to 345 rooms;
• Medium Density (Modified A) up to 127 rooms; and
• Convention Center (CC) Medium Dens ity: up to 125 rooms per gross acre with trip generation characteristics mitigated to the equivalent of 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater.

For those parcels that are developed with hotel/motel rooms which exceed the maximum density designation, the number of rooms existing on the date of adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specif ic Plan Ordinance may be rebuilt or modified at their existing density. For projects that are developed in accordance with the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay, the maximum number of dwelling DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-5 Section 3.0 – Project Description
TABLE 3-1

GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR DRSP, ARSP, AND HCSP Location
General Plan
Land Use
Designations Permitted Density
units allowed shall be less than the number of hotel rooms proposed and such projects shall not create infrastructure impacts greater than the subject property’s permitted hotel/motel densit y, as permitted by the property’s underlying C-R District density designation unless otherwise mitigated through subsequent environmental analysis.

The maximum development density for the PR District is up to:
• 2,158,363 square feet of convention center/meeting space • 100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable space
• 2,500 hotel rooms
• 180,000 square feet of commercial space
Hotel Circle
Specific Plan
(SP 93-1) Area
Commercial
Recreation
The Hotel Circle Specific Plan allows for a master planned hotel project including up to 969 hotel rooms and integrated guest-oriented amenities including full-service restaurants, conference room/banquet facilities, pool and spa areas, tour bus/shuttle facilities, and pedestrian promenades and plaza areas with comprehensive landscaping.

Source: City of Anaheim 2021.

The General Plan Circulation Element identifies several major facilities providing vehicular access to The Anaheim Resort. These include Interstate 5, a Resort Smartstreet (Katella Avenue), Major Arterials (Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way), Primary Arterials (Ball Road, Gene Autry Way including a planned extension between Haster Street and Harbor Boulevard, Haster Street and Chapman Avenue), and Secondary Arterials (Walnut Street, Disneyland Drive/West Street, Clementine Street including a planned extension between Katella Avenue and Orangewood Avenue, Manchester Avenue and Orangewood Avenue). These planned and existing facilities are shown on Exhibit 3-6, Planned Roadway Network.

The Disneyland Resort Project
The City analyzed the environmental impacts of The Disneyland Resort Project, including the adoption of the DRSP, in EIR No. 311, which the City certified in 1993 along with the adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0067. In 1996, in conjunction with an amendment to The Disneyland Resort Project, the City Council approved an Addendum to EIR No. 311, including a Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 0067. As detailed in Table 3-2, Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP For Disney Properties, and shown on Exhibit 3-5, Current Development Districts, the DRSP, as previously amended, currently allows the following development:
 Theme Park District: up to 6,850,000 square feet of theme park uses, up to 1,025 hotel rooms, and up to 475,000 square feet of administration buildings with up to 2,300 associated parking spaces;
 Hotel District: up to 5,600 hotel rooms (including the 1,025 hotel rooms which have been constructed in the Theme Park District), up to 300,000 square feet of retail/restaurant uses, up to 9,930 parking spaces, and up to 200,000 square feet of meeting rooms/convention space;
Exhibit 3-6
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Planned Roadway Network
Passenger & Commuter Rail
Hillside Secondary Arterial
Secondary Arterial
Hillside Collector Street
Collector Street
Hillside Primary Arterial
Primary Arterial
Major Arterial
Stadium Area Smartstreet
Resort Smartstreet
Scenic Expressway
Right-of-Way Reserve
Roadway Classifications
Complete Streets Collector
City Boundary
Freeway/Tollroad
Future Passenger Rail
Grade Separations
!
!
!
!
Orangewood Ave
Chapman Ave Euclid St
9th St
Walnut St
Disneyland Dr
Harbor Blvd
Lewis St
State College Blvd
S Haster St
Disney Way
Gene Autry Way
W
estSt
HarborBlvd
Anaheim
Blvd
Olive
St
EastSt South St
Vermont Ave
S
Ball Rd
Wagner A
South StM
etrolink
§¨¦
5 Cerritos A
West St
(08/28/2023 JMC) R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Graphics\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Planned_Roadway_Network.pdf D:\Projects\3WDI\000400\GRAPHICS\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Planned_Roadway_Network_20230302.ai Source: City of Anaheim General Plan DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-6 Section 3.0 – Project Description
 Theme Park District/Hotel District: up to 350,000 square feet of the theme park square footage allowed in the Theme Park District may be developed as a retail entertainment center in the Hotel District;
 Parking District, East Parking Area: up to 17,600 parking spaces, including up to 5,000 parking spaces that may be located in the Theme Park District;  Parking District, West Parking Area: up to 16,700 parking spaces; and  Future Expansion District: up to 5,100 parking spaces. 2 As of the date of the Notice of Preparation of this Subsequent EIR, October 21, 2021, Disney has developed approximately 45 percent of the approved square footage for theme park uses.

2 In addition to the existing districts detailed herein, the DRSP also includes District A and the C-R Overlay which allow for development of permitted and conditionally per mitted uses allowed by the ARSP, and the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay which provides for development of the Anaheim GardenWalk project subject to Conditional Use Permit No. 4078, as amended. The Project would not modify the allowable development in these districts.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-7 Section 3.0 – Project Description
TABLE 3-2

USES CURRENTLY ALLOWED UNDER DRSP/ARSP

FOR DISNEY PROPERTIES
Disney DRSP
Property
Maximum Allowable
Development Under
DRSP Existing Development1 Remaining Entitlement 1
Hotel District Uses (97 acres)
Hotel Rooms 5,600 hotel rooms 2,342 hotel rooms 2 3,258 hotel rooms Hotel Retail/Restaurant 300,0 00 sf 159,549 sf 140,451 sf Hotel Meeting Space 200,000 sf 161,220 sf 38,780 sf
Parking Spaces 9,930 spaces 5,885 spaces 4,045 spaces
Theme Park District (292 acres)
Theme Park 6,850,000 sf 3,192,885 sf3 3,657,115 sf
Administration Building 475,000 sf 305,430 sf 169,570 sf Administration Building
Parking 2,300 spaces 1,545 spaces 755 spaces
Parking District (57.1 acres)
East Parking Area 17,600 spaces 2,179 spaces4 15,421 spaces West Parking Area 16,700 spaces 16,298 spaces 402 spaces Future Expansion District (24.7 acres)
Parking Area 5,100 spaces 2,529 spaces 2,571 spaces
Disney ARSP
Properties
Maximum Allowable
Development Under
ARSP Existing Development1 Remaining Entitlement1
C-R District Uses (75.4 acres)
1515 S. Manchester
Ave
1585 S. Manchester
Ave
1530 S. Harbor Blvd
(14.88 acres)
1,116 hotel rooms (75
rooms per gross acre or 75
rooms per lot or parcel,
whichever is greater)
Cast Member parking
(1,261 spaces – temporary
parking lot initially approved
on May 8, 2019, and an
approximately 67,424-
square foot office building
1,116 hotel rooms
1900 S. Harbor Blvd
(44.66 acres)
3,348 hotel rooms (75
rooms per gross acre or 75
rooms per lot or parcel,
whichever is greater)
5 Toy Story Parking Lot
(4,635 spaces-temporary
parking lot approved
through June 26, 2024)
3,348 hotel rooms
333 W. Ball Road
(10.69 acres)
534 hotel rooms (50 rooms
per gross acre or 75 rooms
per lot or parcel, whichever
is greater)
Cast Member parking
(1,324 spaces) 534 hotel rooms
1717 S. Disneyland
Drive
(5.15 acres)
564 hotel rooms (50 rooms
per gross acre or 75 rooms
per lot or parcel, whichever
is greater)6
Paradise Pier Hotel (489
rooms and approximately
17,619 square feet in
ancillary commercial uses)
45 hotel rooms
1 These numbers are as of the date of the Notice of Preparation, October 21, 2021; over the course of this environmental review process, these numbers may change due to ongoing development efforts based on current entitlements. 2 Hotel rooms include existing Vacation Ownership Resort (VOR) units at the Grand Californian Hotel and VOR units at the Disneyland Hotel under construction as of NOP.
3 This amount includes the existing 246,702 sf of retail, dining and entertainment in Downtown Disney as of the NOP. The DRSP allows up to 350,000 sf of retail, dining and entertainment sf in either the Theme Park or Hotel District. 4 This amount includes the existing 842 spac es in the Ball Cast Member Lot. The DRSP allows up to 5,000 parking spaces identified for the East Parking Area to be located in the Theme Park District. 5 Acreage for density excludes ulti mate public right-of-way for Clementine Street and Gene Autry Way. 6 The Paradise Pier Hotel property is co mprised of two parcels: a 4.48-acre parce l that includes 489 hotel rooms and a 0.67- acre property that is allowed 75 hotel rooms.

Source: City of Anaheim 2021.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-8 Section 3.0 – Project Description
The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project
The City analyzed the environmental impacts of the ARSP in Master EIR No. 313, which the City certified in 1994, along with the adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C. In December 2012, the City certified Supplemental EIR (SEIR) No. 340, along with the adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C, in support of the approval of Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Project. SEIR No. 340 reevaluated the environmental changes in and around the ARSP area since certification of Master EIR No. 313 in September 1994. SEIR No. 340 incorporated the relevant findings from Master EIR No. 313, particularly related to the loss of agricultural land, which was fully analyzed and identified as a significant and unavoidable impact in Master EIR No. 313. Because a statement of overriding considerations was adopted for this impact associated with Master EIR No. 313, and no new or additional impacts were found to occur with the Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Project, SEIR No. 340 incorporated the findings from Master EIR No. 313 for this topic. For all other topics, SEIR No. 340 superseded the analyses and related findings from Master EIR No. 313. SEIR No. 340 analyzed the cumulative impacts associated with the entire Anaheim Resort and surrounding area, including the full build-out of the three specific plans within The Anaheim Resort. As detailed in Table 3-2, Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP For Disney Properties, the ARSP, as previously amended, allows development on Disney ARSP Properties of up to 75 or 50 hotel rooms per gross acre with approval of a Final Site Plan as indicated below:
 Up to 1,116 hotel rooms on 1515 S. Manchester Avenue (currently used as the Manchester Cast Member Lot), 1585 S. Manchester Avenue (currently occupied by a vacant office building and also used as the Manchester Cast Member Lot), and 1530 S.

Harbor Boulevard (currently used as the Manchester Cast Member Lot);  Up to 3,348 hotel rooms at 1900 S. Harbor Boulevard (currently used as the Toy Story Parking Lot);
 up to 534 hotel rooms at 333 W. Ball Road (currently used as the Harbor Cast Member Lot); and
 Up to 564 hotel rooms at 1717 S. Disneyland Drive (Paradise Pier Hotel).

Section 18.116.070 of the City of Anaheim Municipal Code also allows the development of theme parks, entertainment venues, and transportation facilities on these properties with approval of a conditional use permit.

Non-Disney Properties
For non-Disney properties located in the DRSP and the ARSP, EIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, including the associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans, would continue to apply to future development. Specifically, development in District A, the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay and the C-R Overlay would not be regulated by the mitigation measures associated with this Subsequent EIR.
3 3 Project-related actions that may impact non-Disney prop erties in the Project Site include proposed amendments to The Anaheim Resort Identity Program and The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program, the removal of Gene Autry Way from the General Plan Circulation Element, and the construction of proposed pedestrian bridges.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-9 Section 3.0 – Project Description

3.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Section 15124 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations (CCR), § 15124) requires an EIR to include a statement of objectives sought by a proposed project. This disclosure assists with the development of a reasonable range of proposed project alternatives to be evaluated in the EIR and provides a rationale for adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations if one is necessary. The statem ent of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the proposed project and may discuss project benefits.

The City of Anaheim established objectives relative to The Disneyland Resort Project analyzed in EIR No. 311. The objectives were intended to set the framework and criteria in which the pattern and intensity of growth for the DRSP area was envisioned. Many of these objectives remain applicable to the Project evaluated in this Subsequent EIR No. 352 (SEIR No. 352), which would amend The Disneyland Resort Project, analyzed in EIR No. 311, and the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project, analyzed in Master EIR No. 313 and SEIR No. 340.

The underlying purpose of the Project is to allow continued, long-term growth of The Disneyland Resort Project, approved by the City in 1993, by allowing the movement of theme park, hotel and other retail, dining and entertainment uses permitted under The Disneyland Resort Project to Disney Properties to support a fully integrated, multi-day vacation destination. Another underlying purpose of the Project is to allow the City to perform administrative reviews of Disney’s development projects on Disney Properties.

The objectives of the Project are the ongoing implementation of the following Disneyland Resort Project and ARSP Project objectives which were in place when the City approved The Disneyland Resort Project and the ARSP Project:

The Disneyland Resort Project (from EIR No. 311) objectives:
 To reconfirm and enhance Southern California as one of the world’s greatest tourist destinations;

 To support the ongoing transformation of The Anaheim Resort into a multi-day destination resort for use by Southern California metropolitan area residents, as well as visitors from around the world;

 To promote the goals of the Anaheim General Plan by enhancing visitor-serving commercial uses in the City and to provide a catalyst for the economic and physical enhancement of Anaheim;
 To support the buildout of a fully integrated resort that increases visitation levels and generates an economic base capable of supporting project components consistent with the objectives of the City;
 To maintain and enhance the economic vitality of the City of Anaheim and Orange County by providing business and job opportunities associated with the construction and operation of The Disneyland Resort;
 To enhance The Anaheim Resort by providing a wider range of attractions, hotel accommodations, restaurants, shopping opportunities, and public parking;  To accommodate existing and anticipated traffic through implementation of an innovative transportation and parking plan, including convenient access to parking facilities from freeways, use of conveyance systems to shuttle visitors from parking facilities and hotels to area attractions, and provision of pedestrian walkways throughout The Disneyland Resort;
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-10 Section 3.0 – Project Description
 To lay a foundation for future economic expansion and minimize environmental impacts through comprehensive site development guidelines; and
 To develop public/private cooperation and partnership which utilize the private sector to fund vitally needed improvements in The Anaheim Resort to benefit the public.

The ARSP Project (from SEIR No. 340) objectives:
 To maintain and encourage Anaheim’s position as a nationally recognized tourist, convention and recreation center:
 To increase sales tax yields and further enhance the economic base of the community, thereby lessening the tax burden on real property;
 To encourage the development of quality facilities that complement conventions, family entertainment, and recreation within appropriate areas of the community; and  To maintain the integrity of the Commercial Recreation Area (now referred to as The Anaheim Resort) by permitting only compatible land uses within this designated area.

Additional objectives of the Disneyland Resort Project include:
 To support the continued reimagination of The Disneyland Resort to meet and exceed evolving guest expectations for immersive entertainment and technological advances in theme park and other resort experiences.
 To continue to fulfill the following vision of Walt Disney: “Disneyland will never be completed…It will continue to grow as long as there is imagination left in the world.”  To allow the expansion of theme park and parking uses to Disney ARSP Properties to support the continued success and vitality of The Anaheim Resort, including The Disneyland Resort.

In 2004, the Anaheim City Council adopted a comprehensive update of its General Plan, including some updates to the goals, policies and objectives applicable to The Anaheim Resort. The DRSP and ARSP would continue to implement goals and policies of the General Plan of the City of Anaheim and, specifically, the goal of the City of Anaheim to enhance the attraction of tourists and visitors to The Anaheim Resort. A complete discussion of the relationship between the DRSP, ARSP and the General Plan is found in Section 5.10, Land Use and Planning.

The Project also would generate substantial public revenues and employment opportunities.

Benefits to the local economy would include the creation of direct part-time and full-time employment positions associated with The Disneyland Resort, creation of indirect part-time and full-time employment positions associated with The Disneyland Resort’s supply chains, the labor income associated with these employment positions, additional economic output in the form of goods and services produced by The Disneyland Resort, and State and local tax revenue.

3.5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.5.1 PURPOSE
The primary purpose of this Subsequent EIR is to reevaluate the analysis in EIR No. 311 for The Disneyland Resort Project and the analysis in Master EIR No. 313 and SEIR No. 340 for the ARSP Project due to the changes proposed to these projects by this Project, DisneylandForward.

The Project would allow the transfer of theme park, hotel and other retail, dining and entertainment uses, and parking permitted in The Disneyland Resort Project to Disney Properties and provide DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-11 Section 3.0 – Project Description
for administrative review of Disney’s projects . Many aspects of The Disneyland Resort Project and the ARSP Project have been implemented over the three decades since the City certified the EIRs for these projects and approved these projects. Therefore, this Subsequent EIR provides an update to the analysis in the prior EIRs based on changes to the original projects proposed by DisneylandForward.

3.5.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
As discussed previously, the Project Site is located primarily within areas of The Anaheim Resort and in areas governed by the DRSP and ARSP. The Project Site also includes areas identified in the General Plan as planned extensions of Gene Autry Way between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street and of Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and Orangewood Avenue, portions of which are outside The Anaheim Resort.

Within the DRSP, areas are currently divided into the following five Districts: Theme Park, Hotel, Parking, Future Expansion Districts, and District A as indicated in Exhibit 3-5, Current Development Districts, and Exhibit 3-7, DRSP C-R Overlay and District A. The DRSP, particularly the DRSP Zoning and Development Standards in Chapter 18.114 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, specifies the land uses allowed for each District as summarized in Table 3-2, Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP For Disney Properties. While no changes to overall boundaries of the DRSP are proposed, the Project would allow the transfer of theme park, hotel and other retail, dining and entertainment uses, and parking permitted under The Disneyland Resort Project among the Theme Park, Hotel, Parking, and Future Expansion Districts and divide the DRSP into the following four Districts: Theme Park, Parking, Southeast District, and District A as indicated in Exhibit 3-8, Proposed DRSP Development Districts and ARSP Overlays, and summarized in Table 3-3, Proposed Development Summary for Disney Properties. The Project proposes no changes to the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay, the C-R Overlay , and District A within the DRSP, as shown on Exhibit 3-9, DRSP Anaheim Gar denWalk Overlay, and Exhibit 3-7, DRSP C-R Overlay and District A.

Within the ARSP, Disney ARSP Properties are within the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) of the ARSP. The ARSP, particularly the ARSP Zoning and Development Standards in Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, specifies the land uses allowed for this area as summarized previously in Table 3-2, Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP For Disney Properties. The Project would provide Overlays for Disney ARSP Properties to allow certain DRSP uses on Disney ARSP Properties as summarized in Table 3-3, Proposed Development Summary For Disney Properties.

In summary, the Project would modify the limits of the Theme Park and Hotel District boundaries within the existing DRSP perimeter, rename Districts within the DRSP, and establish Overlays for Disney’s ARSP Properties. Exhibit 3-10, Conceptual Development Scenario – DRSP Southeast District and ARSP Theme Park East Overlay, and Exhibit 3-11, Conceptual Development Scenario – DRSP Theme Park District and ARSP Theme Park West Overlay, illustrate two potential development scenarios for the Southeast District/Theme Park East Overlay and expanded Theme Park District/Theme Park West Overlay, respectively; these scenarios are conceptual in nature and do not necessarily represent actual future buildout. The Project’s proposed densities for Disney Properties are shown in Table 3-3, Proposed Development Summary for Disney Properties, for the updated DRSP and ARSP areas.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-12 Section 3.0 – Project Description
TABLE 3-3

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-13 Section 3.0 – Project Description
TABLE 3-3

Source: WDI 2021.

Proposed Modifications to The Disneyland Resort Project The Project proposes to reallocate allowable land uses within the Theme Park District (389 acres), the Parking District (57.1 acres), and the Southeast District (24.7 acres).4 The former Hotel District would become part of the Theme Park District and the Future Expansion District would become the Southeast District. As discussed previously, the C-R Overlay and District A shown in Exhibit 3-7, DRSP C-R Overlay and District A, would continue to allow specific parcels in the DRSP to become part of The Disneyland Resort or be developed with the uses established by the ARSP. The Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay shown in Exhibit 3-9 also would continue to apply to specific parcels within the DRSP area and would provide for the development of the Anaheim GardenWalk lifestyle retail and entertainment complex.

The Project would allow Disney to move a portion of the unused approved theme park square footage to the existing Hotel District, which would become part of the new expanded Theme Park District of the DRSP. The Project also would allow Disney to move a portion of the unused approved theme park square footage to the existing Future Expansion District, which would become the Southeast District of the DRSP, and to the proposed Theme Park East and West Overlays of the ARSP. The proposed districts and overlays are shown in Exhibit 3-8, Proposed DRSP Development Districts and ARSP Overlays, and described in Table 3-3, Proposed Development Summary for Disney Properties, and are discussed in further detail below.

4 The total DRSP developable acreage would be increased with the proposed abandonment of public righst-of-way in Magic Way and Clementine Street, previously dedicated by Disney to the City.

Exhibit 3-7
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
DRSP C-R Overlay and District A
(05/03/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Graphics\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_DRSP_C-R_Overlay_DistA.pdf D:\Projects\3WDI\000400\GRAPHICS\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_DRSP_C-R_Overlay_DistA_20230503.ai Ball Rd
Katella Ave
Harbor Blvd
Anaheim Blvd
Disneyland Dr
Walnut St
City of
Anaheim
Not a
Part
Clementine St
Disney Way

DISTRICT A
East
Parking
Area
Blvd
Zeyn S
t
Manchester Ave
West Pl
Anaheim
Magic Way
West
Parking
Area
§¨¦5
West St
Haster St
Ox RdCast Pl
Convention Way
Disn
eyland Dr
Anaheim
Convention
Center
Disneyland
Theme Park
CA Adventure
Theme Park
C-R Overlay Medium Density
(up to 75 rooms per gross acre)
LEGEND
°
0 500 1,000
Feet
The Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan Boundary (up to 50 rooms per gross acre)
C-R Overlay Low Density
Notes/Sources
y
City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022
District A
(up to 75 rooms per
gross acre)
Exhibit 3-8
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed DRSP Development Districts and ARSP Overlays
City of
Orange
Gene Autry Way
Manch
ester Ave
Cleme
ntine St
Zey
n St

CITY BOUNDARY
Wilkin Way
Wal
nut St
We
st Pl
Ox
Rd
Ana
heim Blv
d
West St
Disney Way
Haster St
Har
bor
Blvd
Disneyland Dr
Magic Way
C
ast
Pl
East
Parking
Area

PARKING

DISTRICT

THEME PARK

DISTRICT

PARKING

DISTRICT

SOUTHEAST

DISTRICT
West
Parking
Area

PARKING

OVERLAY

THEME PARK WEST

OVERLAY
City of
Anaheim
City of
Anaheim
City of
Garden Grove
City of
Orange
Orangewood Ave
Vermont Ave
Anaheim
Blvd
Chapman Ave
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave

CITY BOUNDARY

CITY BOUNDARY
West St
Haster St
Ball Rd Ball Rd
Wal
nut St
9th St
§¨¦5
Ma
nc
hester A
ve
Convention Way

THEME PARK EAST

OVERLAY

PARKING

OVERLAY
CA Adventure
Theme Park
Disneyland
Theme Park
Anaheim
Convention
Center

DISTRICT A
0 750 1,500
Feet
City Boundary
Notes/SourcesLEGEND
°

DRSP DISTRICTS
The Anaheim Resort
Boundary
The Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan Boundary
City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022Parking Overlay
Theme Park Overlay
(East and West)
Theme Park District
Parking District
Southeast District
pp y

DISNEY ARSP PROPERTIES
District A
Exhibit 3-9
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
DRSP Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay
(04/04/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Graphics\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_DRSP_GardenWalk_Overlay.pdf D:\Projects\3WDI\000400\GRAPHICS\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_DRSP_GardenWalk_Overlay_20230404.ai Ball Rd
Katella Ave
Harbor Blvd
Anaheim Blvd
Disneyland Dr
Walnut St
City of
Anaheim
Not a
Part
Clementine St
Disney Way
Blvd
Zeyn St
Manchester Av
e
West Pl
Anaheim
Magic Way
§¨¦5
West St
Haster St
Ox RdCast Pl
Convention Way
Disneyland Dr
Area A
Area B
Disneyland
Theme Park
CA Adventure
Theme Park
Anaheim
Convention
Center
LEGEND
°
0 500 1,000
Feet
The Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan Boundary
Notes/Sources
City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay
NOTES:

1. The Program Summary for the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay is not proposed to change with this DisneylandForward
Project and is shown in the DRSP document.

Exhibit 3-10
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Conceptual Development Scenario – DRSP Southeast District and ARSP Theme Park East Overlay Note: This scenario is conceptual in nature and does not necessarily represent the actual future buildout; final building plans will comply with Specific Plan regulations.

Additional Uses
!
Theme Park
Experience
! Hotel
!
Retail, Dining and
Entertainment
!
Parking and
Transportation
§¨5

HARBOR BLVD

KATELLA AVE

BALL RD

CHAPMAN AVE

WALNUT ST

PLAN LOCATION

HASTER STANAHEIMBLVD
Katella AveKatella AveKatella Ave
Harbor BlvdHa
rbor Blvd
Harbor Blvd
Exhibit 3-11
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Conceptual Development Scenario – DRSP Theme Park District and ARSP Theme Park West Overlay Katella AveKatella Ave

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-14 Section 3.0 – Project Description
rooms were developed in the expanded Theme Park District and up to 1,852 previously approved hotel rooms in the newly renamed Southeast District.

Theme Park District
The Theme Park District is proposed between Ball Road on the north, Katella Avenue on the south, Walnut Avenue on the west, and Harbor Boulevard on the east and would accommodate the following: the existing Disneyland theme park; the existing Disney California Adventure theme park; Downtown Disney; the portions of the current public right-of-way of Magic Way, which is proposed to be abandoned in the future as part of the Project; the former Hotel District; and associated administration and back-of-house facilities, parking, ticketing, hotel, and retail, dining and entertainment facilities. Exhibit 3-12, Proposed Abandonment Areas, details the areas proposed to be abandoned as part of the Project. As shown on Table 3-3, Proposed Development Summary for Disney Properties, the expanded Theme Park District would allow for up to 6,850,000 previously approved square feet of theme park uses, up to 5,600 previously approved hotel rooms, and previously approved accessory retail, dining and entertainment uses, recreational uses and landscaped areas.

The Theme Park District would provide enhanced pedestrian mobility opportunities through various pedestrian-related amenities, landscaped areas, and routes, including at least one and up to three grade-separated pedestrian bridges over Harbor Boulevard, between Manchester Avenue and Disney Way, to connect the east side of Harbor Boulevard with the Theme Park District. An existing grade-separated pedestrian bridge is located over Disneyland Drive. Up to two additional pedestrian bridges or crossings may be constructed over Disneyland Drive between Magic Way and Katella Avenue. Future development within the Theme Park District would be subject to the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Zoning and Development Standards, including maximum building heights and minimum setbacks from property lines, as detailed in the DRSP and as described later in this Section under Building Heights/Sky Exposure Plane.

Parking may be provided in parking structures or surface lots, and may be located throughout the Theme Park District, although most parking would be located at the perimeter of the Theme Park District and screened from views from the public right-of-way. Hotel parking facilities within this District may be provided in parking structures located adjacent to Walnut Street, which would be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the Walnut Street right-of-way.

Parking District
The Parking District accommodates the public day-use parking facilities within The Disneyland Resort, including visitor and cast member parking and may provide parking for the Anaheim Convention Center. The Parking District accommodates peak attendance days at the theme parks with up to 34,300 total parking spaces, made up of existing and future parking facilities. The District is divided into two areas: the West Parking Area and the East Parking Area.

The West Parking Area is located between Disneyland Drive and Walnut Street north of Magic Way, and currently contains 16,298 spaces in two parking structures. The West Parking Area could accommodate a maximum of 16,700 spaces. Primary ingress and egress are via Disneyland Drive and Magic Way. No public vehicle access would be permitted to or from Walnut Street, except for an existing emergency vehicle access only point north of the Mickey and Friends Exhibit 3-12
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Abandonment Areas
(05/17/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Graphics\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Prop_Abandonment_Areas.pdf D:\Projects\3WDI\000400\GRAPHICS\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Prop_Abandonment_Phasing_20230517.ai Disney Way
Clem
entine St
Zeyn St
West P
l
Disneyland Dr
Magic Way
Cast Pl
Ox Rd
An
aheim Blvd
West
Parking
Area
East
Parking
Area
City of
Anaheim
Manchester Av
e
Convention Way
Ball Rd
Anaheim Blvd
Disn
eyland Dr
Harbor Blvd
Walnut St
Haster St
Katella Ave
Not a
Part
Anaheim
Convention
Center
Disneyland
Theme Park
CA Adventure
Theme Park
§¨¦5
E
E
EE
Approx. 575 ft
Approx. 125 ft
E E
Approx. 1,150 ft
LEGEND
°
The Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan Boundary Proposed Road Abandonments
(See Notes)
Notes/Sources
0 500 1,000
Feet
City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022
NOTES:

Proposed Road Abandonments

1. Magic Way (from the eastern Walnut Avenue right-of-way to Disneyland Drive).

2. Clementine Street (from the southerly Katella Avenue right-of-way to a point approx. 575 feet south, with a width of approx. 87 feet).

3. Hotel Way (located from northern Disney Way right-of-way to approx. 125 feet north, with a width of approx. 70 feet).

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-15 Section 3.0 – Project Description
parking structure and a new emergency vehicle acce ss only point at Magic Way. An existing grade-separated pedestrian bridge is located over Magic Way.

The East Parking Area is located near Disney Way, Clementine Street, and Manchester Avenue and currently contains the Pumbaa surface parking lot with 1,337 spaces north of Disney Way.

The East Parking Area could accommodate a maximum of 17,600 spaces in a parking facility which may be constructed concurrently with a parking facility in the Parking Overlay of the ARSP just north of the East Parking Area, allowing the two facilities to operate as one. The maximum number of parking spaces in this area would be 17,600 spaces. Vehicles accessing the East Parking Area would continue to use ramps from Interstate 5. Existing and proposed pedestrian facilities in the area would facilitate guest mobility from the parking areas to the ticketing and entry area for the theme parks. At least one and up to three grade-separated pedestrian bridges may be constructed over Harbor Boulevard north of Disney Way and south of Manchester Avenue, as part of the East Parking Area Parking Facility and the Parking Overlay of the ARSP. A network of existing and new public and/or private pedestrian walkways along Clementine Street and Manchester Avenue would connect to and provide access to Harbor Boulevard and connect to the future grade-separated pedestrian bridge(s) on Harbor Boulevard. An additional pedestrian walkway connecting to Harbor Boulevard would be provided from the East Parking Area adjacent to Disney Way.

Parking facilities in the East and West Parking Areas would be architecturally treated through use of terraced structures; landscaped buffers and berms; noise attenuation louvers along the openings on the lower levels and solid walls with landscaped planters on the upper levels; and additional landscaping in the setbacks. A detailed description of the proposed parking facility architectural treatment and landscaping adjacent to the East and West Parking Areas can be found in Section 5.0, Design Plan, of the DRSP. The parking facility in the East Parking Area would be designed with similar architecture as the existing parking facilities in the West Parking Area
.

Southeast District
The Southeast District, currently the Future Expansion District, is located south of Katella Avenue, east of Harbor Boulevard and west of Haster Street and is proposed to be developed with up to 390,000 square feet of theme park uses and up to 1,852 hotel rooms. The District may also include up to 5,100 parking spaces in a surface parking lot and/or in a five-level parking structure on the eastern portion of the District, which would provide parking for theme park uses in the amounts required by the DRSP. The District currently contains a surface parking lot containing 2,529 parking spaces and four toll booths for use by Resort guests. Future development in the Southeast District may occur concurrently with development of theme park uses or hotel uses in the Theme Park East Overlay of the ARSP, which currently contains 4,635 parking spaces in the Toy Story Parking Lot used by Resort guests. Access to this District generally will be from Interstate 5 via either Katella Avenue or Gene Autry Way with secondary access from Haster Street. Parking facilities in the Southeast District would be architecturally treated through use of terraced structures; landscaped buffers and berms; noise attenuation louvers along the openings on the lower levels and solid walls with landscaped planters on the upper levels; and additional landscaping in the setbacks. A detailed description of the architectural treatment and landscaping for the proposed parking facility in the Southeast District can be found in Section 5.0, Design Plan, of the DRSP.

District A, C-R Overlay, and Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay The DRSP also contains areas designated as District A, the C-R Overlay, and the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay. The Project does not propose any modifications to these three areas. EIR DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-16 Section 3.0 – Project Description
No. 311 and SEIR No. 340, including the associated Mitigation Monitoring Plans, would continue to apply to future development in District A, the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay and the CR-Overlay.

Proposed Modifications to the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan The Project would create a Theme Park East Overlay within the ARSP for the existing Toy Story Parking Lot and a Theme Park West Overlay within the ARSP for the existing Paradise Pier Hotel.

The Theme Park Overlay would allow Disney to develop theme park uses on these properties concurrently with the development of theme park uses on the expanded Theme Park District or the Southeast District of the DRSP. With the Project, Disney could develop up to 840,000 square feet of previously approved theme park uses wi thin the Theme Park East Overlay and up to 80,000 square feet of previously approved theme park uses within the Theme Park West Overlay for a cumulative total of up to 920,000 square feet of previously approved theme park uses in these Overlays. The Anaheim Municipal Code currently allows theme park uses in these Overlay areas with approval of a conditional use permit.

Disney could also develop hotel rooms in these Overlays as permitted by the existing ARSP (see Table 3-3, Proposed Development Summary for Disney Properties).

Circulation Plan
Vehicular Circulation
Convenient automobile access to The Disneyland Resort is an essential component of the success of The Disneyland Resort Project. Most visitors come to the Project area by automobile or bus, and it is especially important that the visitors’ experience be pleasant upon both arrival and departure. To assure this, the DRSP requires numerous improvements to the circulation system designed to enhance the visitor experience and ensure a safe and efficient transportation system for residents and employees in the area.

Improvements for area roads implemented and to be implemented in connection with The Disneyland Resort Project include: enhanced connections with Interstate 5, improvements to the arterial and secondary road system, and construction of parking facilities to accommodate visitors to The Disneyland Resort and the Anaheim Convention Center. Many of these improvements have been constructed since approval of The Disneyland Resort Project in 1993. The Project would continue to implement physical improvements to the local transportation system envisioned by mitigation measures in the prior EIRs to enhance connectivity, access, and safety.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-17 Section 3.0 – Project Description
The proposed vehicular circulation system is depicted on Exhibit 3-13, Vehicular Circulation Plan.

General vehicular access would continue to be provided from I-5 and the following signalized intersections under the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim: Ball Road/Disneyland Drive, Katella Avenue/Disneyland Drive, Harbor Boulevard/Disney Way, Convention Way/Harbor Boulevard, Clementine Street/Katella Avenue, Clementine Street/Disney Way, Manchester Avenue/Harbor Boulevard, and Ball Road/Harbor Boulevard.

The Project requests the following modifications to the City’s Circulation Transportation System:

Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways Amendment  Removal of the planned future extensions of Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and Orangewood Avenue and Gene Autry Way between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street, which are planned through the Southeast District of the DRSP and the adjacent Theme Park East Overlay in the ARSP; and
 Reclassification of Disney Way between Anaheim Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard from a six-lane Major Arterial to a four-lane Primary Arterial (with no reduction to the width of the ultimate public right-of-way);
General Plan Amendment
 Approval of an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element and the City’s Bicycle Master Plan to remove the Class I Bike Path in the Southern California Edison right-of- way (ROW) between Harbor Boulevard and Anaheim Boulevard and add a Class I Bike Path on the north side of Disney Way between Clementine Street and Anaheim Boulevard;  Approval of an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element and the City’s Bicycle Master Plan to add a Class I Bike Path on the west side of Clementine Street between Alro Way and Disney Way (limits subject to change based on determination of proposed dedication);
 Removal of the planned future extensions of Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and Orangewood Avenue, and Gene Autry Way between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street, which are planned through the Southeast District of the DRSP and the adjacent Theme Park East Overlay in the ARSP;
 Approval of an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element and the City’s Planned Roadway Network map (Figure C-1 of the General Plan Circulation Element) to reflect the following intersection lane configurations:
o At Harbor Boulevard & Convention Way, provide two left-turn lanes, one shared through/right-turn lane, and one exclusive right-turn lane on the eastbound approach and one left-turn lane, one shared through/right-turn lane, and one exclusive right-turn lane on the westbound approach (consistent with existing configuration)
5 o At Haster Street & Gene Autry Way, provide a single shared left-turn/through/right- turn lane for the eastbound approach and three left-turn lanes and two right-turn lanes for the westbound approach. The northbound approach would be equipped with a right-turn signal overlapping with the westbound left-turn signal phase;

5 The final intersection configuration is subject to c hange and will be finalized when a site-specific access analysis is conducted for the Theme Park East Overlay.

Exhibit 3-13
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Vehicular Circulation Plan
(08/18/2023 SAK) R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Graphics\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Vehicular_CirculationPlan.pdf D:\Projects\3WDI\000400\GRAPHICS\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Vehicular_CirculationPlan_20230818.ai City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022
kk
City of
Anaheim
Disney Way
City of
Anaheim
City of
Garden Grove City of
Orange
Gene Autry Way
Orangewood Ave
Vermont Ave
Anaheim Blvd
Harbor Blvd
Chapman Ave
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave
Manchest
er Ave
C
lement
ine
St
Ze
yn S
t
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave

CITY BOUNDARY

CITY BOUNDARY
West St
Haster St
Wilkin Way
W
al
nut
St
Ball Rd Ball Rd
West
Pl
Walnut St
9th St
§¨¦5
Di
sne
yland
Dr
Magic Way
C
ast
Pl
O
x Rd
Ma
nchester
Ave
An
aheim
Blvd
Convention Way
Anaheim
Convention
Center
CA Adventure
Theme Park
Disneyland
Theme Park
East
Parking
Area
West
Parking
Area

PARKING

OVERLAY

THEME PARK WEST

OVERLAY

THEME PARK EAST

OVERLAY

PARKING

OVERLAY
C C
S
S
I
I
I
I I
0 750 1,500
Feet
Notes/Sources
°

MAP FEATURES
Partially Completed DRSP and ARSP
Right-of-Way Improvements
(Combination of completed and remaining
to be completed with future development)
Proposed Road Abandonments
(See Notes)
Proposed Theme Park Drop Off Area
Existing Theme Park Drop Off Area
(Location of Proposed Theme Park Drop Off Area
is approximate)
kj
kj
C Lane Configurations Modified Due to
Removal of Gene Autry Way
Removal of Planned Future Roadway
Extensions
NOTES:

1. More detailed information showing the remaining vehicular and other circulation improvements are described in SEIR 352 and are on file with the City.

2. Vehicular circulation from Magic Way to Walnut Street is right-turn only. As part of DisneylandForward, Magic Way at Walnut Street will no longer provide vehicular access, except for emergency vehicles.

3. Refer to the Proposed Abandonment Areas Exhibit 3-12 for more information on road abandonment areas.

LEGEND
The Anaheim Resort
Boundary
City BoundaryThe Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan Boundary
Disney ARSP
Properties
S Proposed Traffic Signal
I Feasible Improvements Proposed
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-18 Section 3.0 – Project Description
 Reclassification of Disney Way between Anaheim Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard from a six-lane Major Arterial to a four-lane Primary Arterial (with no reduction to the width of the ultimate public right-of-way); and
 Approval of an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element and the City’s Bicycle Master Plan to modify the classification of the planned bike facility on Walnut Street between Katella Avenue and Ball Road from a Class II Bike Lane to a Class I Bike Path on the east side of Walnut Street.

Street Abandonment
 Abandonment of public right-of-way in Magic Way between Walnut Street and Disneyland Drive (pedestrian and emergency access would be provided);  Abandonment of public ROW on Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and the southern property line of the proposed Southeast District of the DRSP; and  Abandonment of public ROW on Hotel Way north of Disney Way.

Other Improvements
 Installation of a pedestrian signal on Walnut Street at Magic Way;  Installation of Class I Bike Path with a single two-way, off-street, shared-use pathway for pedestrians and bicycles with a minimum width of 10 feet 6 on the east side of Walnut
Street from Ball Road to Katella Avenue;
 Installation of (1) a Class I Bike Path with a minimum width of 10 feet on the north side of Disney Way between Anaheim Boulevard
7 and Clementine Street; (2) a single two-way,
off-street, shared-use pathway for pedestrians and bicycles with a minimum width of 10 feet on the west side of Clementine Street between Alro Way and Disney Way; and (3) a bike parking facility in the East Parking Area and/or Parking Overlay just north of the East Parking Area;
 Provide in-lieu contribution and dedicate ROW adjacent to the Project Site on Ball Road and Haster Street for proposed Class II Bicycle Lanes on those streets;  Installation of traffic signal control at the existing driveway to the Southeast District on Haster Street south of Katella Avenue;
8  Installation of traffic signal control at the intersection of Manchester Avenue/Clementine Street and Alro Way;
9  Construction of at least one and up to three pedestrian bridges over Harbor Boulevard north of Disney Way and south of Manchester Avenue with public access to/from the sidewalk on Harbor Boulevard;
 Widen Katella Avenue to four westbound lanes along Disney’s property adjacent to the Theme Park District from Disneyland Drive to approximately 800 feet west of Harbor Boulevard;

6 Where utility relocations are not f easible, the pathway may include brief sections with a minimum width of 8 feet. 7 The portion between Anaheim Boulevard and the I-5 s outhbound off-ramp is under Caltrans jurisdiction. Disney and the City would work with Caltrans to approve and implement this Bike Path. 8 This action would be subject to a traffic signal warrant analysis. 9 This action would be subject to a traffic signal warrant analysis.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-19 Section 3.0 – Project Description
 Widen Katella Avenue to four eastbound lanes along Disney’s property adjacent to the Southeast District (from approximately 700 feet west of Clementine Street to approximately 400 feet east of Clementine Street);
 At the Harbor Boulevard and Disney Way intersection, add a westbound left turn, restripe the westbound through lane to a shared westbound through/right turn lane, and eliminate the north leg crosswalk;
 At the Harbor Boulevard and Katella Avenue intersection, reprogram the traffic signal to double-service the westbound left turn lane to reduce westbound left queuing;  At the Harbor Boulevard and Orangewood Avenue intersection, add a northbound left turn lane and a southbound left turn lane;
 At the Clementine Street and Katella Avenue intersection, add a southbound left turn lane; and
 At the Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street and Katella Avenue intersection, lengthen the southbound left turn and westbound left turn pockets to accommodate queues.

Trip Reduction Measures
The Project would continue to implement a number of trip reduction measures, including those that directly support alternative means of transportation like transit, bicycle travel, and pedestrian movement. Consistent with the originally approved Disneyland Resort Project and ARSP Project, this Project would include pedestrian linkages between land uses and areas of the Project Site, including landscaped walkways, promenades, and plazas. To further enhance pedestrian circulation and connectivity between land uses, the Project would include opportunities for construction of a minimum of one and up to three grade-separated pedestrian bridges over Harbor Boulevard north of Disney Way and south of Manchester Avenue and up to two additional pedestrian bridges over Disneyland Drive.

The Project would continue to implement and administer a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for all cast members, as detailed in Section 5.14.5 of this Subsequent EIR.

Pedestrian Circulation
The development of new attractions and hotel rooms and construction of the peripheral public parking facilities and mass transit systems discussed in this section have increased pedestrian activity in both the Project Site and the surrounding Anaheim Resort. This has enhanced the urban character of the Project Site and requires that facilities be provided to meet the needs of pedestrians.

Exhibit 3-14, Proposed Pedestrian Circulation, illustrates the existing and proposed pedestrian circulation system within the Project Site and surrounding area. Pedestrian routes, pedestrian and vehicular access points, and approximate pedestrian bridge locations are identified on Exhibit 3-15, Pedestrian and Vehicular Access Po ints. The primary destinations of pedestrians within the surrounding area will be:
 The Theme Park District;
 The Southeast District;
 East and West Parking Areas within the Parking District;  The Disneyland Resort hotels within the Theme Park District and Southeast District; Exhibit 3-14
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Pedestrian Circulation
City of
Anaheim
Disney Way
City of
Anaheim
City of
Garden Grove
City of
Orange
Gene Autry Way
Orangewood Ave
Vermont Ave
Anaheim Blvd
Harbor Blvd
Chapman Ave
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave
Ma
nche
ste
r Ave
Cleme
ntine S
t
Zeyn S
t
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave

CITY BOUNDARY

CITY BOUNDARY
West St
Haster St
Wilkin Way
Wa
lnut St
Ball Rd Ball Rd
West
Pl
Wal
nut St
9th St
§¨¦5
Disne
yla
nd Dr
Magic Way
C
ast
Pl
O
x Rd
Ma
nc
heste
r Ave
Ana
heim
Blvd
Convention Way
Anaheim
Convention
Center
CA Adventure
Theme Park
Disneyland
Theme Park
East
Parking
Area
West
Parking
Area

PARKING

OVERLAY

THEME PARK WEST

OVERLAY

THEME PARK EAST

OVERLAY

PARKING

OVERLAY
0 750 1,500
Feet
Notes/SourcesLEGEND
°

MAP FEATURES
Public Pedestrian RouteThe Anaheim Resort
Boundary
The Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan Boundary
City Boundary
NOTES:

1. Sidewalks are provided for all public streets unless shown on this exhibit. Public sidewalks located outside of the boundaries of The Anaheim Resort are not shown on this exhibit.

2. Until parking structure is constructed in the East Parking Area, existing public sidewalk to remain on the north side of Disney Way, west of Clementine Street.

3. Existing public sidewalks to remain on Magic Way until road abandonment occurs.

4. Non-ticketed pedestrian routes for east-west circulation shall be provided through the Theme Park District connecting
major destinations (theme parks, Downtown Disney, hotels and parking facilities) to Harbor Boulevard, Walnut Street, and Disneyland Drive.

City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022
Public Pedestrian Route to be Removed
as part of Road Abandonment
Disney ARSP Properties
(Refer to Proposed Abandonment Areas Exhibit 3-12)
Exhibit 3-15
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Pedestrian and Vehicular Access Points
City of
Anaheim
Disney Way
City of
Anaheim
City of
Garden Grove
City of
Orange
Gene Autry Way
Orangewood Ave
Vermont Ave
Anaheim Blv
d
Harbor
Blvd
Chapman Ave
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave
Ma
nchester Ave
C
lementine S
t
Zeyn
S
t
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave

CITY BOUNDARY

CITY BOUNDARY
West St
Haster St
Wilkin Way
Wa
lnut S
t
Ball Rd Ball Rd
West
Pl
Waln
ut
St
9th St
§¨¦5
Disne
yland Dr
Magic Way
Ca
st Pl
Ox Rd
Ma
nche
ster
Av
e
Anaheim
Blvd
Convention Way
Anaheim
Convention
Center
CA Adventure
Theme Park
Disneyland
Theme Park
East
Parking
Area
West
Parking
Area
3 PARKING

OVERLAY

THEME PARK WEST

OVERLAY

THEME PARK EAST

OVERLAY

PARKING

OVERLAY
0 750 1,500
Feet
Notes/SourcesLEGEND
°

MAP FEATURES
The Anaheim Resort
Boundary
The Disneyland Resort
Specific Plan Boundary
City Boundary
City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022
NOTES:

1. Non-ticketed pedestrian routes for east-west circulation shall be provided through the Theme Park District connecting major destinations (theme parks, Downtown Disney, hotels and parking facilities) to Harbor Boulevard, Walnut Street, and Disneyland Drive.

2. Potential Locations of Pedestrian Bridges:
• Harbor Boulevard, between Manchester Avenue and Disney Way • Disneyland Drive, between Magic Way and Katella Avenue • Katella Avenue connecting The Anaheim Convention Center area to what is now Disney California Adventure Theme Park (EIR 311)

3. As of November 2021, there is bus/shuttle access, however, such access may be removed if a transit center is moved to the DRSP Parking District East Parking Area or the adjacent ARSP Parking Overlay.

4. The location of access points may be adjusted subject to the approval of the City Engineer.

Pedestrian and Vehicular
Access Point
Pedestrian Access Point Vehicular Access Point
(For location at Theme Park East
Overlay, refer to ARSP) Disney ARSP Properties
(For more information on cast
member and service vehicle
access points, refer to DRSP
Section 5.8.3)
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-20 Section 3.0 – Project Description
 The Theme Park Overlays and Parking Overlays of the ARSP;  Hotels, restaurants, businesses, and parking in the surrounding Anaheim Resort; and  The Anaheim Convention Center.

Grade-separated pedestrian bridges serve as a key connector over public street rights-of-way, connecting users from one side of the street to the other without impeding traffic flow. The Disneyland Resort Project, approved by the City in 1993, as amended in 1996, recognized the importance of pedestrian bridges in the Resort area and specifically allowed for three pedestrian bridges – one over Harbor Boulevard approximately 100 feet north of Disney Way, one over Disneyland Drive connecting the Theme Park and Hotel Districts, and one over Katella Avenue between West Street and Harbor Boulevard (in the vicinity of the Anaheim Convention Center area across from what is now Disney Ca lifornia Adventure theme park. Grade-separated pedestrian bridges currently exist over Disneyland Drive and Magic Way. The Project may construct two additional pedestrian bridges or crossings over Disneyland Drive between Magic Way and Katella Avenue. The Project also will construct at least one and up to three grade- separated pedestrian bridges over Harbor Boulevard north of Disney Way and south of Manchester Avenue in connection with the construction and prior to the operation of parking structures and/or a substantial increase in surface spaces or substantial change in operation of those spaces in the DRSP Parking District (East Parking Area) and/or the adjacent Parking Overlay. As an example, those Cast Members park ing in existing surface spaces in the Parking Overlay north of the East Parking Area currently take a shuttle to the theme parks and no pedestrian access to Harbor Boulevard is permi tted until such time that a pedestrian bridge is constructed. Approximate pedestrian bridge locations are identified in Exhibit 3-15, Pedestrian and Vehicular Access Points.

The City is currently reviewing the feasibility of constructing additional pedestrian bridges in The Anaheim Resort, particularly a pedestrian bridge over Harbor Boulevard near Convention Way, a pedestrian bridge over Katella Avenue near Clementine Street, and a pedestrian bridge over Disney Way between Harbor Boulevard and Clementine Street (collectively, “Potential City Pedestrian Bridges”). As part of the Project, Disney has agreed to support the City in its efforts regarding the Potential City Pedestrian Bridges and to allow pedestrian bridge footings to be located on Disney Properties if required in the ultimate bridge designs chosen by the City.

However, the Potential City Pedestrian Bridges are not yet known in sufficient detail to allow for the completion of “meaningful … environmental assessment,” such that undertaking environmental review at this time would be premature under State CEQA Guidelines section 15004. Accordingly, the Project does not bind or commit the City to any definite course of action with regard to the Potential City Pedestrian Bridges and approval of the Project would not constitute the approval of the Potential City Pedestrian Bridges. Any consideration by the City of future actions allowing for the Potential City Pedestrian Bridges is contingent upon completion of environmental review under CEQA, as permitted by State CEQA Guidelines section 15004(b).

An existing pedestrian route running east-west between Harbor Boulevard and Disneyland Drive currently serves as the main connection to the entrances of Disneyland and Disney California Adventure, including ticket booths and entry gates. To the west of the theme park entrances, this walkway becomes the retail, dining and entertainment district known as Downtown Disney, continuing westward on a grade-separated pedestrian bridge constructed over the lowered Disneyland Drive, and currently ending near The Disneyland Resort hotels west of Disneyland Drive. Pedestrian-friendly furnishings, retail and dining uses, and landscaping exist all along this pedestrian route, which while generally open to the public is on private property and subject to Disney restrictions. Project implementation may include reconfiguration and/or replacement of the existing east-west pedestrian route, including the space currently devoted to central theme park ticketing and gate functions. With any such changes, a non-ticketed pedestrian route for east- DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-21 Section 3.0 – Project Description
west circulation shall be provided through the Theme Park District connecting major destinations (theme parks, Downtown Disney, hotels and parking facilities) to Harbor Boulevard, Walnut Street, and Disneyland Drive, and would meet public safety size requirements.

Utilities
The Project Site is located within a fully urbanized and built-out area of the City of Anaheim and is currently served by existing utility lines, including electricity, natural gas, water, storm drain, and sewer. The Project would allow the transfer of theme park, hotel and other retail, dining and entertainment uses, and parking permitted in The Disneyland Resort Project, which, depending on available capacity as development occurs, may require upgrades to on-site and offsite distribution and collection systems located within the Project Site and surrounding area. Disney would connect to existing or install new electrical, natural gas, water (including fire water), storm drain, and sewer lines throughout the Project Site to serve the Project, per City regulations. Disney would size all proposed utility lines internal to the Project Site to accommodate forecasted demands.

Drainage and Water Quality Features
Individual development projects would include implementation of storm water treatment best management practices (BMPs), which would treat storm water from the Project Site prior to discharging into the existing storm drain laterals, as further detailed in Section 5.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, and summarized here. In addition, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would be developed and implemented for each individual development project that involves more than one acre of ground disturbance. Short-term, construction-related BMPs would include various measures to control on-site erosion; reduce sediment flows into the storm water; control wind erosion; track soil and debris into adjacent roadways and off-site areas; and manage wastes, materials, non-stormwater management, wastewater, liquids, hazardous materials, stockpiles, equipment, and other site conditions in order to prevent pollutants from entering the storm drain system. Inspections, reporting, and storm water sampling and analysis also would be required if discharge to the storm drain system is suspected to ensure that visible and non-visible pollutants are not discharged off the Project Site. The following structural source control BMPs would achieve long-term water quality enhancement through proposed drainage and treatment systems: construction of dry weather flow dive rsion; installation of Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) infrastructure; implementation of automatic rain diversion systems; provision of storm drain stenciling and signage; design of outdoor hazardous material storage areas; trash enclosures; efficient irrigation systems and landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control; and incorporating requirements applicable to individual priority project categories. Non-structural BMPs, including education for property owners, tenants, and occupants, activity restrictions, and BMP maintenance would reduce pollutant loading into storm water runoff. Additionally, for each individual development project, the post development drainage flows would be less than or equal to pre-development or additional on-site retention and/or improvements of offsite drainage facilities would be required, per City regulations.

Police and Fire Services
The Project site is currently served by City of Anaheim Police Department and Anaheim Fire and Rescue. Disney would continue to work with the City’s Police and Fire Departments to ensure all new development complies with public safety and access requirements. Consistent with EIR No. 311, the Disneyland Resort Project provided for a police security office area adjacent to the Disneyland security office, which currently serves The Disneyland Resort. To the extent relocation, modification, improvement or expansi on to on-site facilities are needed in the future, DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-22 Section 3.0 – Project Description
these would be limited to the Project Site and would not require any off-site physical improvements.

Landscape and Streetscape Elements
The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program and The Anaheim Resort Identity Program
The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program and The Anaheim Resort Identity Program regulate the landscape and streetscape elements within The Anaheim Resort. The Public Realm is defined as the ultimate public right-of-way of public streets, the Setback Realm includes private property between the ultimate public right-of-way and the Private Realm, and the Private Realm which is the buildable portion of privately owned property. As part of DisneylandForward, amendments to these documents are proposed to allow for the use of improved technologies and more low water plants in landscaping. Exhibits in these documents would be updated to include current photos of the Identity Elements and landscaping in The Anaheim Resort, replacing older photos and graphic representations from the originally adopted documents. Exhibit 3-16, Landscape Concept Diagram for The Anaheim Resort Public Realm, details the tree patterns within the public right-of-way that contribute to the unified environment of The Anaheim Resort. The DRSP and ARSP currently incl ude their respective versions of this exhibit; as part of DisneylandForward, the landscape concept exhibits will be removed from the DRSP and ARSP and would continue to be included in The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program, since the information on the exhibit pertains to the public right-of-way. The Anaheim Resort Identity Program would also be updated to describe the general locations of pedestrian bridges in The Anaheim Resort, consistent with the proposed amendments to the DRSP and ARSP and as described in Exhibit 3-15, Pedestrian and Vehicular Access Points.

Design Plans
Significant landscape improvements have occurred within setbacks on private property as a result of implementation of The Disneyland Resort Project and conformance with Design Plans from the DRSP and ARSP. Future landscape improvements would be subject to the Design Plans, as detailed in the DRSP and ARSP, which is intended to unify and enhance the visual character of the DRSP and ARSP areas and the surrounding area with landscape. It also contains a description of the basic landscape concepts, criteria for the selection of plant material including low water plant types, and general planting design guidelines for the Setback Realm.

Tree and Plant Selection Matrices
The DRSP and ARSP currently include Tree and Plant Selection Matrices with specific species that may be used within the Public Realm, Setback Realm, and Private Realm. These matrices would be combined and updated to include tree and plant species that require lower water usage and general planting guidelines to address pest and disease issues, while still providing the lush landscape that is representative of The Anahei m Resort. These matrices, once updated, would be removed from the DRSP and ARSP and would be implemented by a Planning Standard Detail.

The matrices would address trees and plants in the Public Realm, Setback Realm and areas beyond the Setback Realm that are visible from the public right-of-way, providing expanded flexibility for areas on private property that are not visible from public view.

Architecture
As part of the Project, design criteria would be included in the DRSP and ARSP to ensure a consistent approach to future on-site buildings and structures visible from the public right-of-way Exhibit 3-16
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Landscape Concept Diagram for The Anahiem Resort Public Realm "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" "" """"""
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
""
"
"
"
"
"
"
" " " " "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" " " " " " "
" " " " "" " " " "
""
""
" " " " " " "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
! ! !
!
! !!!!!!!!
" "
"""""
!
!
!
"
"
!
!
"
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
"
"
"
"
"
"
!
!
!
!
!
!
"
"
"
!
!
!
!
!
!
"
"
"
!
!
"
!!!!!!!!! """""
!
!
!
!
!
!
"
"
"
!
!
"
!
!
!
!
"
"
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
" "
"
"
"
"
! ! !
!
!
!
!
" "
"
"
!
!
!
"
"
! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
" "
"
"
"
!
!
!
" "
# # # # # # # ######
# # # # # #
# #
# # # # # # # #
## # # # # #
# # ######
# #
#
#
##
#
#
##
#
#
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
!! !! !! !! !!!! !! !! !! !! !! !!
!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!
!! !! !! !! !! !! !!
!! !! !!!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!
!! !! !! !! !! !! !!
!! !! !!!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
! ! ! ! ! !!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!!
!
!
! !
City of
Anaheim
Disney Way
City of
Anaheim
City of
Orange
Gene Autry Way
Orangewood Ave
Vermont Ave
Anaheim Blvd
Harbor Blvd
Chapman Ave
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave
Man
ch
ester Ave
Cleme
ntine St
Zeyn
S
t
Cerritos Ave
Katella Ave

CITY BOUNDARY

CITY BOUNDARY
West St
Haster St
Wilkin Way
Walnut St
Ball Rd Ball Rd
We
st
Pl
Waln
ut St
9th St
§¨¦5
Disneyland D
r
Magic Way
C
ast
Pl
Ox Rd
Ma
nch
ester A
ve
Anaheim
B
lvd
Convention Way
Anaheim
Convention
Center
CA Adventure
Theme Park
Disneyland
Theme Park
City Legal Lot Data, 2022
City Boundary Data, 2022
0 750 1,500
Feet
Notes/SourcesLEGEND
°

PARKWAYS
Palm Trees
Canopy Trees
Harbor Boulevard/Katella Avenue
Central Core Intersection Area
Alternating Palm/Canopy Trees
Double Rows of Palm Trees
City Boundary
NOTES:

1. Symbols are not intended to represent individual trees; see text and landscape cross sections in DRSP Section

5.3.7 and ARSP Section 5.4 for additional information.

2. Existing landscape to remain on Magic Way until road abandonment occurs; see The Anaheim Resort Public
Realm Landscape Program for description of existing
landscape.

The Anaheim
Resort Boundary
""""
!!!!
!!!!""
!!!!
!!!!
Canopy Trees
Vertical Trees
Palm Trees
Alternating Palm/Canopy
Double Row of Palm Trees
Vertical Trees####

MEDIANS
Parkways to be provided with relocation
of Theme Park Drop-Off Area
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-23 Section 3.0 – Project Description
along Walnut Street, Katella Avenue, Harbor Boulevard, Ball Road, Haster Street, Clementine Street, Manchester Avenue, along the southern and eastern property boundaries at the existing Toy Story Parking Lot, and along other internal boundaries of the Parking Overlays, Southeast District, Theme Park Overlay, and Parking District. Design criteria would include identifying appropriate architectural treatments at varying heights while utilizing new and existing fence/wall and landscape buffers. Architectural treatments may include one or more combinations of paint or simple graphic applications, screening with simple ornamentation, and/or articulated facades, rockwork, or other complex ornamentation.

Building Heights/Sky Exposure Plane
With the Project, the DRSP and ARSP would continue to implement a modified Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map and amended zoning and development standards of the Anaheim Municipal Code, including a Sky Exposure Plane, which would limit building heights and require buildings to step back from the property line along certain roadways. The intent of the Sky Exposure Plane is to 1) permit more natural light to reach the street or property line adjacent to a proposed building or structure, and 2) reduce the apparent bulk and mass of any building.

The Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map, described in Section 18.40.080 (Structural Height Limitations – Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area) of the Anaheim Municipal Code, is on file in the Planning and Building Department. The Anaheim City Council approved this map in 1993 to preserve the special character of The Anaheim Resort by protecting the theme parks from visual intrusion by surrounding land uses. The map limits the heights of buildings closest to the Theme Park District to 75 feet, with higher building heights allowed the further a property is located from this District. The DRSP zoning and development standards regulate building heights within the Theme Park District. The modified map, included as Exhibit 3-17, Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map (A.M.C. Section 18.40.080), shows the DRSP would regulate building heights within a larger portion of the Theme Park District and the Southeast District and the ARSP would regulate building heights within the Theme Park East and West Overlays because previously entitled theme park uses are proposed to be permitted in these areas. No other changes are proposed to the map.

Within the two DRSP Districts and two ARSP Overlays shown on the modified map, the height of buildings would be limited according to the proposed sky exposure plane, with maximum allowable heights to be developed at a reduced height at the required setback adjacent to perimeter streets and, for the Southeast District and the Theme Park East Overlay, also at the required setback adjacent to residential zones. As an example, buildings would be limited to a maximum height of 50 feet along Walnut Street at the required street setback. Behind the setback on Walnut Street, building heights may increase at a rate of 1 foot of height for each 2 feet of additional setback from the property line.

Building height limits would vary within each of the below Districts and Overlays as follows:
 Theme Park District: 45 to 250 feet, with four theme park elements permitted up to 300 feet in height;
 Southeast District: 45 feet to 170 feet;
 Theme Park West Overlay: Up to 250 feet; and
 Theme Park East Overlay: 50 to 170 feet, with one theme park element permitted up to 200 feet in height.

Exhibit 3-17
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map (A.M.C. 18.40.080)

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-24 Section 3.0 – Project Description
Environmental Sustainability
The Walt Disney Company (TWDC) has expressed a commitment to protecting the planet and delivering a positive environmental legacy for future generations (TWDC 2022). As such, TWDC continues to invest in environmental sustainability measures and has published its progress most recently in the 2022 Corporate Social Responsibility Report. This Report also provides information on TWDC’s efforts to incorporate environmental sustainability into its future worldwide operations by investing in efforts to reduce GHG emissions, reduce waste, use water responsibly, and make deliberate choices in material selection and sustainable building design.

TWDC has identified five areas of focus to promote environmental sustainability company-wide, including greenhouse gas emissions, water, waste, materials, and sustainable building design.

TWDC’s commitment to sustainability and long-term environmental strategies, including the 2030 Sustainability Goals discussed below, applies across the geographic regions in which TWDC and its subsidiaries operate their business.

Climate and Energy
 Net zero emissions for direct operations
 100 percent zero carbon electricity
 Innovation for low carbon fuels
 Natural climate solutions
Water and Oceans
 Implement localized watershed stewardship strategies
 Source sustainable seafood
Waste
 Zero waste to landfill for wholly owned and operated parks and resorts  Reduce single-use plastics in parks and resorts
Materials
 Use recycled, certified, or verified sustainable paper and wood  At least 30 percent recycled plastic or a lower impact alternative in products and packaging  Design packaging for reuse, recycling, or composting
 Use of recycled, sustainably sourced, or lower-impact alternative textiles  Sustainable production processes for products
Sustainable Design
 New projects achieve near net zero GHG emissions, maximize water efficiencies and are designed to support zero waste operations
 90 percent diversion for construction waste for domestic and European Union projects DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-25 Section 3.0 – Project Description
In pursuit of environmental sustainability on the Project Site, Disney has successfully implemented various initiatives that go beyond compliance with federal, State and local environmental rules and regulations. In particular, Disney has reduced fossil fuel consumption, focused on using cleaner, renewable energy sources, and engaged in water conservation efforts, all of which have contributed to annual reductions in air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions, and promoted more responsible resource use. These voluntary efforts continue to improve The Disneyland Resort’s sustainability perform ance in line with TWDC’s public commitments.

Examples of key initiatives include:
 An early focus of Disney’s environmentally-focused culture, Disneyland Railroad steam trains and the Mark Twain Riverboat were converted in 2009 to be fueled with 99.9 percent biodiesel made from used kitchen cooking oil, replacing the 200,000+ gallons of petroleum diesel fuel previously used every year to fuel those attractions;  In 2016, Cars Land received a 40,000-square-foot photovoltaic system (solar array) atop the Radiator Springs Racers attraction;
 In 2016, Disney successfully completed a ten-year diesel minimization plan through which Disneyland Finding Nemo submarines were re-powered with zero emission technology, diesel-fueled construction light towers were replaced with solar light towers, and diesel- fueled pressure washers were replaced with propane or electric units. This initiative reduced The Disneyland Resort’s diesel fuel consumption by nearly 90 percent;  Since 2014, Disney has deployed over 400 electric vehicle charging ports for guests and cast members, and intends to continue growing its EV-charging infrastructure;  Over the years, Disney has placed considerable emphasis on reducing water consumption through various conservation measures, efficiency and reuse. In 2019, Disney used less potable water than in 2009, all while serving many more guests;  The Disneyland Resort manages its irrigation based on changing weather conditions using an on-site weather system comprised of satellite irrigation controllers around the resort.

The weather system’s features include drip irrigation, flow sensors and cut off valves, soil moisture sensors and water-friendly planting, among other features;  Disney worked with the Orange County Water District (OCWD) to develop a process for storing water instead of releasing it to the ocean through storm drains. When large bodies of water or water attractions are drained at the resort, the water is sent to the OCWD’s Groundwater Replenishment System, where it is purified and added to Orange County’s groundwater supply;
 Each year, Disney’s Property Control department collects and repurposes over one million pounds of company assets that the company no longer needs. These include theme park props, décor, furniture, and appliances removed during refurbishments. The assets are reused internally, offered to cast members and/or donated to local charities;  The Disneyland Resort maintains a recycling program that has grown into a comprehensive resort-wide effort, both onstage and backstage. Over 25 different commodities are collected at the resort for recycling, including cardboard, paper, plastics, glass, metal, food waste, green waste and construction debris. With these efforts, The Disneyland Resort diverts more than 30 million pounds of materials from landfill annually;  Since launching a food scraps program in 2013, The Disneyland Resort continues to make great strides in reducing and recovering food waste. Today, this program diverts over five million pounds of food waste from landfills annually. In 2019, participation expanded throughout the resort to include locations in food and beverage service areas, storefronts, DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-26 Section 3.0 – Project Description
and office buildings. This program has been recognized by external groups multiple times, including most recently by the U.S. EPA Food Recovery Challenge in 2020; and  In 2018, The Disneyland Resort Circle D Ranch achieved TRUE Zero Waste Platinum Certification.

The Project would incorporate the following key features:
 Use of high-efficiency light-emitting diode (LED) indoor and outdoor lighting;  Use of water-efficient landscaping, with no turf;
 Use of low-flow sprinkler heads in irrigation system;  Use of waterways re-circulation systems;
 Use of low-flow fittings, fixtures, and equipment, including low flush toilets and urinals;  Use of self-closing valves on drinking fountains;
 Use of reclaimed water for irrigation and washdown when it becomes available;  Continuation of the existing cooling tower recirculation system;  Use of efficient irrigation systems such as drip irrigation and automatic systems which use moisture sensors;
 Use of low-flow shower heads in hotels;
 Use of water-efficient ice machines, dishwashers, clothes washers, and other water-using appliances;
 Use of irrigation systems primarily at night when evaporation rates are lowest;  Display of water conservation information to the public in conspicuous places;  Use of vacuum and other equipment to reduce the use of water for washdown of exterior areas;
 Consultation with the Anaheim Public Utilities Community and Sustainability Division for assistance with energy-conservation design features;
 Use of high-efficiency air conditioning systems, connected if feasible to a computerized central energy management system, and meeting all control, scheduling and load efficiency requirements of the California Energy Code (Title 24, Building Efficiency Standards);
 Use of electric equipment designed to conserve energy and reduce fossil fuel use;  Incorporation of electric vehicles chargers into parking structures;  Use of recycled paper products for stationery, letterhead, and packaging;  Recovery of materials such as: food scraps, cardboard, recyclables, landscape material, kitchen grease, scrap metal and many other recoverable materials; and  Continued participation in the City of Anaheim’s voluntary “Recycle Anaheim” program or other substitute program as may be developed by the City.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-27 Section 3.0 – Project Description
In order to meet the requirements of the Solid Waste Reduction Act of 1989 (AB 939) and the State Organics Law (SB 1383), the Project would implement numerous solid waste reduction programs at the Disney Properties.

Administrative Review of Development
The Project would allow the City to perform administrative reviews of development projects at the Disney Properties in the future. Upon approval of the Project, the property owner (Disney) could submit building plans for projects proposed by Disney at the Disney Properties to the Planning and Building Department for review by the Planning Services Division for conformance with the applicable specific plan, associated zoning standards and other requirements set forth in the Project mitigation measures and Development Agreement prior to issuance of building permits. If the plans are in conformance with the requirements of the applicable specific plan, no discretionary review by the Planning and Building Director, Planning Commission or City Council would be required.

Project Phasing and Construction Activities
For purposes of analysis, it is assumed Disney would implement the Project over the next decades depending on market conditions. To account for the potential of construction activities throughout the Project Site, the potential physical construction impact area as analyzed in this Subsequent EIR is depicted as the “Project Site” as shown in Exhibit 3-2. For individual development actions, the exact timing, phasing, and construction durations are undefined; however, for purposes of analysis, each development would undergo a standard construction process involving demolition, site preparation/grading, building construction and utility infrastructure installation, paving and architectural coating. In order to prepare an analysis that represents a conservative peak day condition, the analysis assumes construction of all remaining hotel rooms (8,301) concurrently in multiple 500-room hotels. Further detail on the peak day construction scenario is discussed in Section 5.2, Air Quality.

3.6 BASIS FOR CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS
Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR, § 15355) defines cumulative impacts as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts”.

Section 15355 further describes potential cumulative impacts as follows:
(a) The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects.
(b) The cumulative impacts from several projects are the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.

Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR, § 15130) requires an EIR to discuss cumulative impacts when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable, as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a)(3) (14 CCR, § 15065). The EIR’s discussion shall reflect the severity of the impact and the likelihood of occurrence, but not in as great detail as provided for the effects of the project alone.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-28 Section 3.0 – Project Description
Section 15130(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines states that the information utilized in an analysis of cumulative impacts should come from one of two sources:

1. A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or

2. A summary of projections contained in an adopted local plan or related planning document.

The cumulative impacts analyses contained in this EIR use both methods. As appropriate, the cumulative impact analyses provided in this EIR uses the City of Anaheim General Plan as well as the City of Garden Grove General Plan and the City of Orange General Plan Update for analyses related to land use compatibility and traffic/circulation. These cumulative impact analyses take into consideration the demographic projections and land use build out assumptions outlined in the City’s General Plan and General Plan Final EIR No. 330 and addenda thereto that were approved by the City of Anaheim in 2004, and all amendments in place at the time the Notice of Preparation for this EIR was published, as well as projected build out of the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan, Anaheim Resort Specific Plan, Hotel Circle Specific Plan, the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan; and full build out of the City of Anaheim General Plan as well as general plans of adjacent jurisdictions (City of Garden Grove and City of Orange), as applicable.

In addition to the list of projects, the cumulative analyses for individual topical issues may consider specific cumulative study areas designated by respective agencies for regional or areawide conditions. Topic-specific cumulative study areas have been developed for traffic, air quality, and aesthetics. Also, this EIR considers regional programs directed at mitigating cumulative development impacts such as those instituted for urban runoff.

3.7 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The City of Anaheim is the lead agency under CEQA and has the principal approval authority over the Project. A responsible agency is a public agency other than the lead agency that has responsibility for carrying out or approving a project (CEQA Guidelines § 15381 (14 CCR, § 15381) and CEQA Section 21069 (Public Resources Code § 21069)). The Project would require the following discretionary actions, detailed in Table 3-4, Anticipated Discretionary Actions.

TABLE 3-4

ANTICIPATED DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
Agency Action
City of Anaheim
Certification of a Subsequent Environmental Impact
Report to EIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340 and adoption of
a Mitigation Monitoring Program.

Approval of an amendment to the Land Use Element of
the City of Anaheim Gener al Plan to describe the
amended District names, and new Overlays and
associated density.

Approval of an amendment to the Circulation Element of
the City of Anaheim General Plan to (1) remove the
planned future extensions of Clementine Street between
Katella Avenue and Orangewood Avenue and Gene
Autry Way between Harbor Boulevard and Haster Street;
and (2) to reclassify Disney Way between Anaheim
Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard from a six-lane Major
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-29 Section 3.0 – Project Description
TABLE 3-4

ANTICIPATED DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
Agency Action
Arterial to a four-lane Primary Arterial (with no change to the width of the ultimate public right-of-way).

Approval of an amendment to the General Plan
Circulation Element and the City’s Bicycle Master Plan
(1) to remove the Class I Bi ke Path in the Southern
California Edison right-of-way (“ROW”) between Harbor
Boulevard and Anaheim Boulevard and add a Class I
Bike Path on the north side of Disney Way between
Clementine Street and Anaheim Boulevard; (2) to add a
Class I Bike Path on the west side of Clementine Street between Alro Way and Disney Way (limits subject to
change based on determination of proposed dedication);
and (3) to modify the classification of the planned bike facility on Walnut Street between Katella Avenue and Ball Road from Class II Bike Lanes to a Class I Bike Path on the east side of Walnut Street.

Approval of an amendment to the General Plan
Circulation Element and the City’s Planned Roadway
Network map (Figure C-1 of the General Plan Circulation Element) to reflect the following intersection lane
configurations: (1) at Har bor Boulevard & Convention
Way, provide two left-turn lanes, one shared
through/right-turn lane, and one exclusive right-turn lane on the eastbound approach and one left-turn lane, one
shared through/right-turn lane, and one exclusive right- turn lane on the westbou nd approach (consistent with
existing configuration); and (2 ) at Haster Street & Gene Autry Way, provide a single shared left-turn/through/right- turn lane for the eastbound approach and three left-turn lanes and two right-turn lanes for the westbound
approach. The northbound approach would be equipped
with a right-turn signal overlapping with the westbound left-turn signal phase.

Revise maps, figures, text, and tables throughout the
General Plan to reflect these changes.

Approval of amendment to the Anaheim Commercial
Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height
Map (Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.40.080
(Structural Height Limitation – Anaheim Commercial
Recreation Area).

Approval of an amendment to the DRSP and the DRSP
Zoning and Development Standards (Anaheim Municipal
Code Chapter 18.114).

Approval of an amendment to the ARSP and the ARSP
Zoning and Development Standards (Anaheim Municipal
Code Chapter 18.116), includ ing approval of the Theme
Park East Overlay, the Them e Park West Overlay, and
the Parking Overlay.

Approval of amendments to The Anaheim Resort Public
Realm Landscape Program and The Anaheim Resort
Identity Program.

Approval of the abandonment of the public right-of-way in Magic Way between Walnut Street and Disneyland Drive,
in Clementine Street between Katella Avenue and the
southern property line of the proposed Southeast District DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

3-30 Section 3.0 – Project Description
TABLE 3-4

ANTICIPATED DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
Agency Action
of the DRSP, previously dedicated by Disney to the City, and in Hotel Way north of Disney Way.10
Approval of an encroachment agreement for at least one
and up to three pedestrian bridge(s) over Harbor
Boulevard and up to two additional pedestrian bridge(s) over Disneyland Drive a nd termination/amendment of
existing encroachment agreements affected by the
abandonment of City right-of-way (such as the
agreements for the pedestrian bridge over Magic Way)
and public service easements (i ncluding, but not limited to, landscape maintenance, public utilities, and access). 11 Approval of an amendment to the 1996 Development
Agreement between Walt Disney World Co. (renamed
Walt Disney Parks and Resort s U.S., Inc. in 2009) and
the City.

Approval of a Discretionary Exemption to establish the
timing of Street and Other Right-of-Way Dedications and Improvements (Anaheim Municipal Code Section

18.40.060 Dedications and Improvements).

Approval of an amendment to the Anaheim Resort
Maintenance District (ARMD).

Orange County Transportation Authority
Approval of an amendment to the Orange County Master
Plan of Arterial Highways (M PAH) to (1) to remove the
planned extensions of Gene Autry Way between Harbor
Boulevard and Haster Street and of Clementine Street
between Katella Avenue and Orangewood Avenue,
which are planned through the Southeast District of the DRSP and the adjacent existing Toy Story Parking Lot in the ARSP; (2) to remove the portion of Disneyland Drive between Ball Road and Katella Avenue; and (3) to
reclassify Disney Way between Anaheim Boulevard and
Harbor Boulevard from a six-lane Major Arterial to a four lane Primary Arterial.

Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
In addition to the anticipated discretionary actions listed above, the Project must obtain approval from all other public and quasi-public agencies, including:
 California Department of Transportation;
 Orange County Sanitation District;
 Orange County Flood Control District;
 Regional Water Quality Control Board;
 South Coast Air Quality Management District; and
 Southern California Edison.

10 Specific limits of str eet abandonment shall be determined and approved by the City Engineer and City Council.

Abandonment shall take place in accordance with the Street and Highway c ode together with approved City regulations and policies.
11 Final location and design pursuant to t he approval of the Public Works Director.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-1 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
SECTION 4.0

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

4.1 INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Under Section 15125 of the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must include a description of the existing physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of a project to provide the “baseline condition” against which project-related impacts are compared. Generally, the baseline condition is the physical condition that exists when the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published, which was October 21, 2021 for this Project. Section 15125 of the State CEQA Guidelines recognizes, however, the use of environmental baselines that differ from the NOP date is reasonable and appropriate when doing so results in a more accurate or conservative environmental analysis.

The following discussion details the existing conditions at the time the NOP for this Draft Subsequent EIR was published; however, consistent with CEQA’s supplemental review standards, the previously approved projects, The Disneyland Resort Project, including the DRSP, as analyzed in EIR No. 311, and the ARSP Project, including the ARSP, as analyzed in SEIR No. 340 serve as the baseline for analysis purposes. Under CEQA, a subsequent EIR compares the effects of the Project changes to the prior projects with the effects of the previously analyzed and approved projects. The information below is summarized from the technical sections in Section 5.0 of this Draft Subsequent EIR.

4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Aesthetics
Within and immediately surrounding the Project Site, there are no distinct natural landscape features or natural visual resources or vistas. Due to the size and physical layout of the Project Site, the visibility of land uses is dependent on location and intervening structures. Since adoption of the DRSP in 1993 and the ARSP in 1994, the Project Site and the surrounding area have experienced dramatic changes in visual character, most notably, the construction of Disney’s California Adventure, the Grand Californian Hotel, Downtown Disney, the Mickey and Friends and Pixar Pals parking structures, and other surface parking areas which modified views from surrounding roadways and land uses.

Air Quality
The Project Site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which is an arid region with little rainfall and abundant sunshine during the summer months. The combination of meteorology, topography, and emissions from the SoCAB, known as the nation’s second largest urban area, results in some of the worst air quality in the United States. Sensitive air quality receptors are located proximate to the Project Site, including residential and hotel uses along South Cambridge Street, Ball Road, Walnut Street, Haster Street, Katella Avenue, and Harbor Boulevard. In addition, school uses in the local area include Orange Grove Elementary School, Stoddard Elementary School, Palm Lane Charter School, Prince of Peace Lutheran School, and Mark Twain School. Ambient air quality conditions measured from local monitoring stations note recent (2019 to 2021) violations of the federal and State ozone (O 3), particulate matter 10 microns or
less in diameter (PM10), and particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5) standards.

Biological Resources
The entirety of the Project Site has been historically subject to grading and development, which has eliminated the area’s natural features, topography and vegetation. The Project Site is DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-2 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
generally developed and does not contain natural vegetation communities; however, ornamental trees and other vegetation occur throughout the Project Site.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
The prehistory and history of the Project Site included occupation by indigenous populations dating back to the Early Man Horizon, or Paleo-Indian Period. At the time of European contact, this part of Orange County, including Anaheim, was the home of the Gabrielino, or Tongva. The American Period (1848-present) has been characterized by agriculture followed by residential development. Construction of Disneyland began in 1955. The entirety of the Project Site has been historically subject to grading and development, which has eliminated the area’s natural features, topography, and vegetation.

Energy
The Anaheim Public Utilities (APU’s) Electrical Se rvices Division provides electricity for The Anaheim Resort, including the Project Site. The APU’s distribution system consists of 89 miles of transmission lines, 1,148 miles of aboveground and underground distribution lines, 12 substations, and 2 main stations. APU’s electricity supply comes from a variety of renewable and conventional (non-renewable) sources located in the City and across the Western United States. Notably, APU owns a 2.4-megawatt municipal solar photovoltaic system consisting of 7,908 panels, which produces 3.5 million kilowatt hours (kWh) annually. The Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) currently provides natural gas service to an approximately 24,000 square mile area, including the City of Anaheim and the Project Site. The service is provided in accordance with SCGC’s policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission. SCGC is actively implementing sustainable strategies to reduce reliance on high carbon fuels by delivering cleaner fuels such as renewable natural gas, clean hydrogen, and synthetics gas (syngas).

Geology and Soils
The Project Site is located in a geologic region known as the Central Block of Los Angeles basin that is characterized by thick layers of alluvium overlying predominantly sedimentary rock of the Pleistocene through Cretaceous ages. The Project Site slopes in a southwesterly direction and drains through the storm drain system to the Anaheim Barber City Channel , which merges with the Bolsa Chica Channel, and drains to Huntington Harbor with its ocean outlet through Anaheim Bay. There are existing storm drain lines in and near the Project Site which provide storm water drainage for existing developments.

Greenhouse Gas
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are generated on an annual basis from the Project Site by area sources, energy sources, mobile sources, solid waste disposal, and water and wastewater transportation and treatment. Area source emissions are generated by the operation of landscape maintenance equipment and the use of consumer products. Energy sources are generated by the consumption of natural gas for heating, hot water, and cooking, and the generation of electricity.

Mobile source emissions are generated by the vehicles traveling to and from the Project Site.

Solid waste disposal generates GHG emissions through transportation and processing of solid waste and release of methane at landfills. GHGs for water supply, distribution, and treatment and wastewater treatment result from the electricity required for the processes.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-3 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Over 1,722 listed hazardous waste sites and hazardous materials-related sites either are located within the Project Site or within 0.25-mile of the Project Site. Listed sites include both permitted facilities whose operations use, produce, or transport hazardous materials, as well as the locations of reported releases and/or clean-up operations (remediation). A single site can be listed in multiple databases. The listed sites include large and small generators of hazardous waste.

Also, listed sites include gas stations, dry cleaners, and other facilities where there are known aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), USTs, and leaking underground storage tanks (LUSTs).

Listed sites also include sites where Hazardous Material Incident Reports were previously filed by first responders.

Buildings on the Project Site were constructed beginning in the 1950s and have the potential to include lead-based paint (LBP), asbestos-containing materials (ACM), and Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Transite pipe, an asbestos-cement product used in some utility lines, may also be located on the Project Site.

Hydrology and Water Quality
The Project Site is located within the Anaheim Bay, Huntington Harbor, and Bolsa Chica Watershed Management Area (Watershed). The Project Site and surrounding area slopes in a southwesterly direction and drains through the storm drain system to the Anaheim Barber City Channel, which merges with the Bolsa Chica Channel, and drains to Huntington Harbor with its ocean outlet through Anaheim Bay. There are existing storm drain lines in and near the Project Site which provide storm water drainage for existing developments, some of which have been identified in the City’s General Plan as deficient. The Project Site is located within the Coastal Plain of the Orange County Groundwater Basin (the Basin), which underlies the northern half of Orange County; at the Project Site, groundwater is generally greater than 50 feet below the existing grade.

Land Use and Planning
The Project Site is located within areas governed by the DRSP and ARSP, as depicted in Exhibit 3-5, Current Development Districts, in Section 3, Project Description. Uses currently allowed under the DRSP and ARSP for Disney Proper ties as well as existing levels of development are shown in Table 3-2, Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP For Disney Properties, in Section 3, Project Description. The Project Site is largely developed with theme park, hotel, retail, restaurant, administrative, and surface and structured parking uses associated with The Disneyland Resort. Existing land uses within the Project Site include the area governed by the DRSP consisting of Disneyland, Downto wn Disney, Disney California Adventure Park, Disney’s Grand Californian Hotel & Spa, Disneyland Hotel, Disney administration offices, back- of-house uses, and parking lots/structures owned or controlled by Disney as well as hotels, motels, retail centers, rental car offices, and convenience stores owned by third parties. Existing land uses within the Disney ARSP Properties include surface cast and guest parking lots, an office building, and the Paradise Pier Hotel and associated parking structure. The areas governed by the DRSP and ARSP are surrounded by a variety of land uses including hotel, motel, retail, restaurant, single-family residential, multi-family residential, and recreational land uses. The zoning designation for the planned extension of Gene Autry Way west of Haster Street is within an existing apartment complex, which is located outside of The Anaheim Resort and designated on the General Plan and zoned for multiple-family residential uses.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-4 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
Noise
The local ambient noise environment on the Project Site includes noise related to operation of rides, amplified music and live shows, audience and crowd noise, mechanical equipment, parking, and back of house operations. Occasional noise from fireworks also occurs during prescribed events. Additionally, a source of noise at the Project Site is traffic along local roadways and the I-5.

Population and Housing
The Project Site is located within a fully developed area and operates as a major employment center within the City and region. Current projections for the City of Anaheim anticipate an increase in the City’s population from 356,700 in 2016 to 416,800 in 2045; an increase in the City’s number of households from 101,100 in 2016 to 122,700 in 2045; and an increase in the City’s employment from 197,200 in 2016 to 250,500 in 2045.

Public Services
The Project Site is located within the service areas of the City of Anaheim Department of Fire & Rescue (AF&R), the City of Anaheim Police Department, the Anaheim Elementary School District, the Anaheim Union High School District, and the Anaheim Public Library. Both AF&R and the Police Department serve the Project Site and maintain resources on the Project Site, including fire resources assigned under contract to The Disneyland Resort, and the South Police Station located at 1520 South Disneyland Drive. Local parks are owned and operated by the City, including local special use parks, such as mini-parks, nature centers, and specialized recreation centers, neighborhood parks, and community parks.

Transportation
The existing roadway network within and around the Project Site consists of a system of freeways, arterials, and smart streets. These facilities pr ovide regional, sub-regional, and local access and circulation to and within the Project Site. The freeway system provides regional access to the Project Site. I-5 provides the primary regional access to the Project Site; however, State Route (SR) 57, SR-22, and SR-91 also provide regional access to the Project Site. Together these freeways also provide extensive regional connectivity to the Project Site.

A variety of public transit options are available to access the Project Site. These include: OCTA Route 37; OCTA Route 43; OCTA Local Route 46; OCTA Route 47; OCTA Route 50; OCTA Route 83; OCTA Bravo Route 543; Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Route 460; Riverside Transit Agency CommuterLink Route 200; and the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC ) Express. Additionally, ARTIC is located approximately 2.9 miles east of the Project Site on Katella Avenue and is a major transit hub with additional local bus and commuter rail services.

Buses and shuttles provided by Disney carry guests from the West Parking Area to the west side of the theme park entry plaza and a bus service carries guests from the Toy Story Lot to the East Esplanade transportation hub on the east side of the theme park entry plaza. Some of the non- Disney hotels in the vicinity offer complimentary guest shuttles to the East Esplanade transportation hub. Also, the ART system provides a number of short distance routes throughout The Anaheim Resort area.

There is a substantial amount of pedestrian traffic within the Project Site and surrounding area, particularly along Katella Avenue and Harbor Boulevard within The Anaheim Resort. The Disneyland Resort and the Anaheim Convention Center are the primary drivers of pedestrian DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-5 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
activity within the Project Site. Pedestrian trips occur between the theme parks and surrounding restaurants, hotels, and parking areas. Sidewal ks, signalized crosswalks, and accessible curb ramps are provided throughout the Project Site. Private pedestrian infrastructure also exists within the Project Site, including pedestrian bridges over Magic Way adjacent to Disneyland Drive and over Disneyland Drive as part of Downtown Disney entertainment district.

Utilities
Water, wastewater and electricity are provided to the Project Site by APU. Natural gas is provided by Southern California Gas Company. Solid waste hauling services are provided by Republic Waste Services of Southern California LLC (Anaheim Disposal) and solid waste is disposed of at the Olinda Alpha Landfill and Frank R. Bowerman Landfill, which are part of the OC Waste & Recycling system.

4.3 APPLICABLE LAND USE PLANS
The City of Anaheim General Plan is a comprehensive, long-term plan intended to guide the future of the City. The Project Site is designated by the General Plan as Commercial Recreation and is located within The Anaheim Resort. The Anaheim Resort includes three specific plan areas: the DRSP, the Hotel Circle Specific Plan No. 93-1 (HCSP) and the ARSP, as previously discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description. Exhibit 3-2, Local Vicinity and Existing Specific Plan Designations, in Section 3.0, Project Description, shows the Project Site in context to The Anaheim Resort area and the boundaries of all three of the specific plan areas within The Anaheim Resort. The Anaheim Resort Identity Program and The Anaheim Resort Public Realm Landscape Program work together to create a uniform identity and landscape program to improve the visual quality of the entire Anaheim Resort. These two documents provide visual consistency between the three specific plans.

The Project Site is located in areas governed by the DRSP and ARSP. Within the DRSP, areas are currently divided into the following five Districts: Theme Park, Hotel, Parking, Future Expansion District, and District A. The DRSP also contains the CR-Overlay and the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay. The DRSP, particularly the DRSP Zoning and Development Standards in Chapter 18.114 of the City’s Municipal Code, specifies the land uses allowed for each District and Overlay as summarized for the Disney Properties in Table 3-2, Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP For Disney Properties, in Section 3.0, Project Description. Within the ARSP, the Disney ARSP Properties are located within the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1). The ARSP, particularly the ARSP Zoning and Development Standards in Chapter 18.116 of the City’s Municipal Code, specifies the land uses allowed for this area as summarized in Table 3-2, Uses Currently Allowed Under DRSP/ARSP For Disney Properties, within Section 3.0, Project Description.

The City analyzed the environmental impacts of The Disneyland Resort Project, including the adoption of the DRSP, in EIR No. 311, which the City certified in 1993 along with the adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 0067. In 1996, in conjunction with an amendment to The Disneyland Resort Project, the City Council approved an Addendum to EIR No. 311, including a Modified Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 0067.

In September 1994, the Anaheim City Council certified Master Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 313 (State Clearinghouse No. 91091062) along with the adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85 in support of the adoption of the ARSP. Two validation reports were prepared (1999 and 2004) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of Master EIR No. 313. In December 2012, the Anaheim City Council certified SEIR No. 340, a Supplemental EIR to Master EIR No. 313, in conjunction with its approval of the Amendment No. 14 to the ARSP Project. SEIR DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-6 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
No. 340 reevaluated environmental changes in and around The Anaheim Resort since certification of Master EIR No. 313. SEIR No. 340 also evaluated an expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center and an update of the ARSP document. The Anaheim City Council adopted findings and a statement of overriding consi derations, updated and adopted Modified Mitigation Monitoring Program No. 85C, and approved a water supply assessment in conjunction with the certification of SEIR No. 340. One validation report was prepared (2019) to evaluate the continued relevance and accuracy of Master EIR No. 313 and SEIR No. 340.

In addition to these planning documents, the Project Site is also governed by several regional and local plans, including Connect SoCal, a long-range visioning plan focusing on land use and transportation strategies to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern; the Master Plan of Arterial Highways that plans out the regional arterial highway network; and the Orange County Congestion Management Plan that is intended to maintain level of services standards on key intersection in the County. These plans and the Project’s consistency with these plans are further discussed in Section 5.10, Land Use and Planning.

4.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSUMPTIONS–RELATED PROJECTS
CEQA requires that EIRs analyze cumulative impacts in addition to project-specific impacts. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 defines cumulative impacts as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b) indicates the analysis of cumulative impacts need not be as in-depth as what is provided relative to a proposed project, but instead is to “be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness.” Cumulative impacts are anticipated impacts of the project along with reasonably foreseeable growth. According to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1), reasonably foreseeable growth may be based on either of the following:

1. A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessa ry, those projects outside the control of the agency, or

2. A summary of projections contained in a local, regional or statewide plan, such as a general plan, regional transportation plan, or plans for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, or related planning document that describes or evaluates conditions contributing to the cumulative effect.

The cumulative impacts analyses contained in this Draft Subsequent EIR use both methods.

Cumulative study areas are defined based on an analysis of the geographical scope relevant to each particular environmental issue. Therefore, the cumulative study area for each individual environmental issue may vary.

As appropriate, the cumulative impact analyses provided in this Draft Subsequent EIR use the study area in the City of Anaheim General Plan adopted by the City in 2004 (Anaheim 2004).

These cumulative impact analyses take into consideration the demographic projections and land use buildout assumptions outlined in both the DisneylandForward Project and the City of Anaheim General Plan.

In addition to the City of Anaheim General Plan study area, the cumulative analysis for individual topical issues may consider specific cumulative study areas designated by respective agencies for regional or area-wide conditions. For instance, topic-specific cumulative study areas have been developed for air quality (e.g., South Coast Air Basin). Also, this Draft Subsequent EIR DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-7 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
considers regional programs directed at mitigating cumulative impacts of development such as those instituted for urban runoff. A description of the basis for the cumulative impact analysis for individual topical issues is provided within each cumulative analysis discussion in Sections 5.1 through 5.16 of this Draft Subsequent EIR.

Finally, and where appropriate to the analysis in question, cumulative impacts are assessed with reference to a list of “cumulative projects,” as described by Section 15130(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Cumulative projects within one mile of the Project Site are described in Table 4-1, List of Cumulative Off-site Projects, and shown in Exhibit 4-1, Cumulative Projects. The cities of Anaheim, Garden Grove, and Orange were contacted to obtain lists of any potential development projects.

Section 15130(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that EIRs discuss the cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable. Where a lead agency is examining a project with an incremental effect that is not cumulatively considerable, it does not need to consider the effect significant but shall briefly describe the basis for its conclusion. As further clarified by Section 15065 of the State CEQA Guidelines, “cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual 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. If the combined cumulative impact associated with the project’s incremental effects and the effects of other projects is not significant, Section 15130(a)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires a brief discussion in the EIR about why the cumulative impact is not significant and is not discussed in further detail.

Section 15130(a)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires supporting analysis in the EIR if a determination is made that a project’s contribution to a significant cumulative impact is rendered less than cumulatively considerable and, therefore, is not significant. To support each significance conclusion, this Draft Subsequent EIR provides a cumulative impact analysis and, where Project impacts have been identified that, together with the effects of other pending projects, could result in cumulatively significant impacts, these potential impacts are documented.

Mitigation measures are to be developed, where feasible, to reduce the project’s contribution to cumulative effects such that the contribution is not considerable. This cumulative analysis assumes that all mitigation measures identified in Sections 5.1 through 5.16 to mitigate project impacts are adopted, unless otherwise specified. The analysis analyzes whether, after adoption of project-specific mitigation, the residual impacts of the Project would cause a cumulatively significant impact or would contribute considerably to existing/anticipated (without the project) cumulatively significant effects.

!
!
!
!
!!!!
Walnut St
Sunkist St
S Olive St
S 9th St
Taft St
N Loara St
S East St
W Orange Ave
9th St
Benton St
Lampson Ave
S Walnut St
E Broadway
W Sycamore St
E Vermont Ave
W South St
E South St
E Santa Ana St
N West St
S Loara St
Lampson Ave
2 4
1 3
5 6
7 8
9 1011
12 13
14 17
15 18
16 20 22
21 23
2526
24 28
27 29
30 3132 34
33 35
37 36
38 39 40
4142
43 44
46 47
45 48
51 49
50 19
Trask Ave
E Ball Rd
S Euclid St
E Lincoln Ave
Santa Ana Fwy
S State College Blvd
Disneyland Drive
Harbor Blvd
Manchester Ave
Disney Way
W Katella Ave
Convention Way
Twintree Ln
Chapman Ave
Harbor Blvd
Chapman Ave
E Katella Ave
Anaheim Blvd
W Santa Ana St
W Broadway
W Ball Rd
S Lewis St
W Midway Dr
W Tiller Ave
Union St
Lewis St
E Orangewood Ave
S Gillbuck Dr
Haster St
Gene Autry Way
Orangewood Ave
Clementine St
Anaheim Blvd
Anaheim Way
Magic Way
W Broadway
Orangewood Ave
W St
N Flower St
Cerritos Ave
§¨
5 ²
Cumulative Projects Exhibit 4-1
3,200 0 3,2001,600
Feet
Project Site
Project Site 1-Mile Buffer
Cumulative Projects
! Designated for Future Extension in
General Plan Circulation Element
Specific Plan Areas
Disneyland Resort Specific Plan
(
SP92-1)
Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP92-2)
Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP93-1)
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
(Rev: 8-18-2023 JVR) R:\Projects\WDI\3WDI000400\Graphics\EIR\3rd_City_Review\ex_Cumulative_Projects.pdf Aerial Source: City of Anaheim Open Data, 2021
D:\Projects\3WDI\000400\PRO\3WDI_Project\3WDI_Project.aprx\ex_Cumalative_Projects_20230421

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-8 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
TABLE 4-1

LIST OF CUMULATIVE OFF-SITE PROJECTS

Project City
Project
Location Description Status
1 Anaheim 1030 West Ball Road Demolish two existing hotels located at 1030 and 1042 West Ball Road to consolidate the parcels and construct a new 5-story hotel with subterranean parking.

In Review
2 Anaheim 1150 West Magic Way The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit, tentative parcel map, and final site plan to construct a 12-story, 350-unit vacation ownership resort development adjacent to, and integrated with, the Disneyland Hotel.

Approved
3 Anaheim 1847 South Mountain View
Avenue
Conceptual development review application for the phased construction of 1,163 hotel rooms, 1,108 residential units, 32,450 sf retail, and 2,629 parking spaces.

In Review
4 Anaheim 2184 South Harbor Boulevard Conceptual develo pment review for a proposed Flame Broiler restaurant in an existing office building; and demolition of existing apartments for a parking lot.

In Review
5 Anaheim 1060 West Katella Avenue A request for a minor amendment to final site plan number 2016-00002 to incorporate 1060 West Katella Avenue to be constructed as a garden area.

In Review
6 Anaheim 308 West Vermont Avenue Demolition of exis ting single-family residence and construction of a new four-unit multiple-family building.

In Review
7 Anaheim 200 West Midway Drive A conceptual development review application for a new 159 attached townhome development at the existing RV park.

Approved
8 Anaheim 1730 South Anaheim Way 11,038 square foot addition to existing warehouse with accessory office In Review 9 Anaheim 1860 South Lewis Street A conceptual development review application to permit a new maintenance building and associated site improvements for an outdoor storage yard.

In Review
10 Anaheim 517 East Katella Avenue Conceptual development review for two restaurants with drive-throughs. In Review 11 Anaheim 517 East Katella Avenue Conceptual development review for demolition of existing 19,000 square foot retail building and new construction of a 5,864 square foot automotive retail / e-commerce fulfillment "Carvana vending machine" In Review
12 Anaheim 710 East Katella Avenue Conceptual development review for demolition of commercial building to allow outdoor storage of trucks, and containers for the Freeman Company.

In Review
13 Anaheim 110 West Midway D rive Affordable housing density bonus for 4-story housing development. Approved DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-9 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
TABLE 4-1

LIST OF CUMULATIVE OFF-SITE PROJECTS

Project City
Project
Location Description Status
14 Anaheim 1200 South Anaheim Boulevard A request to cons truct a total of 223 residential units (187 townhome and 36 flats) ranging from three to four stories, with 4,586 square feet of commercial space. A general plan amendment, conditional use permit, and tentative tract map are being requested.

Approved
15 Anaheim 125 East Ball Road Application to demolish an existing two-story commercial building and construct an 88-room hotel and a 2,800 square foot fast food drive thru restaurant pad
In Review
16 Anaheim 125 East Ball Road A conditional use permit and zoning reclassification to develop a 120 room La Quinta Inn & Suites and adjacent food court building In Review
17 Anaheim 311 West South Street Conceptual development review for proposed 24 three-story residential townhomes.

In Review
18 Anaheim 1227 South Claudina Street Administrative re view for approval per underlying zone standards for a new bus charging facility for the Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN) In Review
19 Anaheim Tract 17703 Request to permit a final site plan for an attached single-family development consisting of 73 residential units in development Area F of the existing A-Town development. A conditional use permit to allow for private patios larger than permitted by code
Approved
20 Anaheim 1338 East Katella Avenue Request to permi t a final site plan for a mixed-use development consisting of 270 residential units and 21,615 square feet of ground-floor commercial space in development Area B of the existing A-Town development.

Approved
21 Anaheim 270 East Palais Road CDR for demolition of existing building and build new 100,000 square foot building
In Review
22 Anaheim 1432 East Katella Avenue Final site plan fo r Area C and Area D of the A-Town master site plan.

This project will consist of 253 units and 17,278 square feet of commercial space in Area C; 255 residential units in area d. Parking will be provided at-grade and underground.

In Review
23 Anaheim 560 South Gilbuck D rive STR relocation from 2063 South June to 560 South Gilbuck Drive. In Review 24 Anaheim 1845 South State College Blvd Request to permit a final site plan for 257 multi-family residential units in development Area E of the A-Town development.

Approved
25 Anaheim 201 South Walnut Street The applicant requests approval of a tentative parcel map to establish a 2-lot single family residential subdivision.

Approved
26 Anaheim 201 South Walnut Street Request for approval of a tentative parcel map to establish a 2-lot single family residential subdivision.

In Review
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-10 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
TABLE 4-1

LIST OF CUMULATIVE OFF-SITE PROJECTS

Project City
Project
Location Description Status
27 Anaheim 2040 South State College
Boulevard
Construct a mixed-use project consisting of 947 residential units and 25,000 square feet of commercial space within the Platinum Triangle In Review
28 Anaheim 898 West Lincoln Avenue A conditional use permit to permit a 4-story, 43-unit apartment building Approved 29 Anaheim 1455 South Salvation Place A request for a t entative parcel map for financing purposes only for a new permanent supportive. Housing development (72 units) and emergency shelter (325 beds)
Approved
30 Anaheim 100 South Manchester Avenue Request approval for a new administrative office and bus maintenance facility for Anaheim Transportation Network (ATN)
Approved
31 Anaheim 275 East Santa Ana Street Review of a general plan amendment, zoning reclassification, conditional use permit, and tentative tract map to construct a 56-unit attached, single-family residential project
In Review
32 Anaheim 320 West Broadway Conditional use permit review for amendment to conditional use permit 2014-05735 to separate the existing school building from the church with a lot split.

In Review
33 Anaheim 900 East Ball Road Conceptual development review for a new 105,000 square-foot tilt-up warehouse building
In Review
34 Anaheim 403 South Claudina Street Two new attached dwelling units In Review 35 Anaheim 375 East Santa Ana Street A request to demolish the existing lumberyard and construct 55 new single family attached condominiums.

In Review
36 Anaheim 122 West Broadway A conditional use permit to permit a 32-unit apartment building with modified standards on a 0.59-acre lot
In Review
37 Anaheim 1325 South Euclid Street The applicant requests approval of a variance to permit a front landscape and structural setback less than permitted by the municipal code to permit the construction of a 3,853 square foot one-story office building.

Approved
38 Anaheim 921 South Euclid Street Change of use: 9,216 square feet. For first time build out of new medical office (b) "DaVita healthcare".

In Review
39 Anaheim 2223 East Katella Avenue Conceptual develo pment review for construction of two new industrial buildings totaling 338,000 square feet, and a lot line adjustment to combine four parcels into two.

In Review
40 Anaheim 2300 East Katella Avenue Site upgrades to include ADA parking, landscaping, lighting and new entry store front
In Review
41 Anaheim 2000 East Gene Autry Way Amendment to development agreement no. DAG2020-00002 for the redevelopment of Angel Stadium.

In Review
42 Anaheim 2000 East Gene Autry Way A vesting tentat ive tract map no. 19146 for a subdivision of the 150.4- acre site for the redevelopment of Angel Stadium.

In Review
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-11 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
TABLE 4-1

LIST OF CUMULATIVE OFF-SITE PROJECTS

Project City
Project
Location Description Status
43 Anaheim 2331 East Katella Avenue A conceptual devel opment review to construct a coffee shop with a drive- through and outdoor dining.

In Review
44 Anaheim 1551 West Lincoln Avenue Conceptual develo pment review of a new maintenance facility with bus washing for Anaheim Transportation Network
In Review
45 Garden Grove 12202 Harbor Boulevard A request to amend planned unit development no. PUD-128-12 to create a new subarea, PUD-128-12(a), to facilitate the development of a new 3,267 square foot pad restaurant. Also, a request for site plan approval to construct a 3,267 square foot drive thru raising cane's restaurant, along with associated site improvements on a vacant property, located at 12202 Harbor Boulevard.

Project/Per
mit
Complete
46 Garden Grove 11891 Loara Street Director's review request to allow a fifth and sixth bathroom, as part of a proposal to construct a new two-story, 8-bedroom 4,999 square-foot single family dwelling, attached two-car garage, attached workshop, porte cochere, a detached two-car garage, and a detached accessory dwelling unit at 11891 Loara street.

Under
Constructio
n
47 Garden Grove 11712 Lampson Avenue A request to approve a one-year time extension for the approved entitlements under site plan no. SP-081-2020 and tentative tract map no. 18181 to subdivide an existing 47,284 square foot lot, improved with a single-family home, into four (4) residential lots that will be served by a private street designed as a cul de-sac (lot 5). Each lot was approved with a lot size of 10,031 square feet (lot 1), 8,312 square feet (lot 2), 10,520 square feet (lot 3), and 7,783 square feet (lot 4). The existing single-family home will be reconfigured to fit within the developable lot area of lot 1, and lots 2, 3 and 4 will each be developed with a new two- story, single family home. Also, a minor land deviation was approved to allow the front yard fence for lot 1, located along Lampson Avenue, to be constructed at a height of 6 feet.

Entitlements
Granted
48 Garden Grove Northwest corner of Twintree
Avenue and Harbor Boulevard,
east of Tamberlane Drive, at
12241 Harbor Boulevard, 12261
Harbor Boulevard, 12271 Harbor
Boulevard, 12291 Harbor
Boulevard, 12311 Harbor
Boulevard, 12323 Harbor
Boulevard, 12322 Thackery Drive,
12312 Thackery Drive, 12292
Thackery D
rive, 12282 Thackery
A request to amend planned unit development no. PUD-141-01 to create a new sub-area, PUD-141-01(a), and site plan approval to facilitate the development of a full-service high-rise hotel resort with hotel program entertainment/pool decks, ballroom/meeting space, and food and beverage opportunities on 3.72-acre site. The proposed project will consist of 500 guest suites with balconies; themed pool experience with lazy river; storage and loading area at 8,600 square feet maximum; event space with a 600-person maximum occupancy theater; a grand ballroom at 9,490 square feet; two (2) meeting rooms at 4,194 square feet and 4,031 square feet, respectively; a variety of food and beverage opportunities to be placed throughout the hotel totaling in a maximum Entitlements
Granted
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

4-12 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting
TABLE 4-1

LIST OF CUMULATIVE OFF-SITE PROJECTS

Project City
Project
Location Description Status
Drive, 12262 Thackery Drive,
12252 Thackery Drive, 12246
Thackery Drive, 12251
Thackery Drive, 12261 Thackery
Drive, 12281 Thackery Drive,
12291 Thackery Drive, 12311
Thackery Drive, 12321 Thackery
Drive
area of 22,296 square feet; themed amenities totaling 13,238 square feet; a 7,000-square foot arcade; spa and fitness center at 8,532 square feet; and a five-level parking structure with 528 parking spaces. 49 Orange 600 West City Parkway 213 multiple family residential apartment units with an internal parking structure and a commercial office parking structure to replace existing surface parking.

Approved
50 Orange 200 West City Boulevard Three new 4-story multifamily buildings consisting of 167 apartments to be added to an existing multifamily development.

Approved
51 Orange 291 North Spinnaker Street Detached 797 s quare foot, 2 bedroom, 1 bathroom accessory dwelling unit and 188 square foot room addition to the existing home and at 188 square foot patio
Pending
Note: The cumulative projects included herein were current at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was circulated.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-1 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics

5.1 AESTHETICS
This section discusses the existing aesthetics setting of the Project Site and assesses the Project’s potential impacts related to aesthetics.

5.1.1 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan EIR No. 311
The Visual Resources and Aesthetics analysis for EIR No. 311, certified by the City in 1993, determined that implementation of The Disneyland Resort Project would have beneficial impacts on the area as a result of the extensive landscaping and design features proposed. It was determined that, although the Disneyland Resort would change some adjacent properties exposure to the sun, the effect on the adjacent private properties would not limit or degrade the use of the properties, including residential uses along Walnut Street, on the west side of the West Parking Area, and along Ball Road. Additionally, no significant impacts related to nighttime illumination features were identified. However, EIR No. 311 anticipated unavoidable adverse visual impacts for property owners immediately adjacent to the West Parking Area and hotel parking facilities along Walnut Street, and potentially the Future Expansion District, even with the implementation of PDFs 3.12-1, 3.8-1, 3.8-2, and 3.5-3 and MMs 3.2-1, 3.2-2, 3.12-1 through 3.12-5. Additionally, EIR No. 311 provided a separate analysis of construction-related impacts and specifically identified that the project would cause visual disruption during construction activities. Despite the use of construction barriers that were identified as PDF 8.3-2, EIR No. 311 found that construction-related impacts related to visual resources and aesthetics were significant and unavoidable. The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to these potential impacts. EIR No. 311 analyzed potential shade and shadow impacts on surrounding uses and found no significant impacts would occur. No other significant impacts were anticipated. Subsequent addenda to EIR No. 311 did not find any new or additional impacts beyond those addressed in EIR. No. 311.

EIR No. 311 Mitigation Measures
EIR No. 311 and Modified MMP No. 0067
1 presented the following project design features and
mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with The Disneyland Resort Project to less than significant levels. As discussed above, despite implementation of mitigation measures, certain aesthetics impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

MM 3.2-1 The applicant shall implement all project design features or their environmental equivalent. The City of Anaheim Planning Department will ensure compliance through the mitigation monitoring process.

MM 3.2-2 Prior to issuance of each building permit, for parking facilities associated with the Hotel and Parking Districts, the property owner/developer shall submit plans detailing the setbacks for the parking structures and landscaping plans which minimize compatibility impacts of the parking facilities on surrounding areas, consistent with Section 5.7 of the Specific Plan.

MM 3.12-1 The applicant shall implement all project design features or their environmental equivalent. The City of Anaheim Planning Department will ensure compliance through the mitigation monitoring process.

1 Addendum No. 1 to EIR No. 311, which t he City approved in 1996, modified MMP No. 0067.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-2 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
MM 3.12-2 Prior to issuance of each building permit; to be implemented prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall submit plans which illustrate that all mechanical equipment and trash areas for the subject buildings will be screened from adjacent public streets and adjacent residential areas.

MM 3.12-3 With the exception of the West Parking Facility and exclusive of the Theme Parks including the Retail/Entertainment Component, prior to issuance of each building permit (for non-setback realm areas) and prior to approval of Final Site Plan (for setback realm areas); For the West Parking Facility, prior to approval of initial building permits for interim condition of a portion of the West Parking Area (for the final landscape plans for the Walnut Street Setback area and for the area adjacent to the Walnut Street soundwall in the private realm); and prior to approval of building permits for the ultimate condition of the West Parking Area (for the final landscape plans for West Street/ Disneyland Drive setback landscape, Cerritos Ave. setback landscape, landscaping at entrance to hotels and landscaping interior to hotel and RD&E parking); the property owner/developer shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan for areas outside of the theme parks. This plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall include a phasing plan for the installation and maintenance of landscaping associated with that building permit.
(Note: Prior to 10/97, environmental equivalent approved which clarifies the timing relative to the Setback Realm Areas and non-Setback Realm Areas and its inapplicability to the theme parks including the retail/entertainment component. It should be noted that this measure will apply to and be monitored with the ultimate landscaping only and not with any interim landscaping condition.

On 10/8/97, environmental equivalent approved to clarify the timing for the West Parking Facility as the SP-4 portion of the West Parking Area will first be developed to accommodate surface parking in an interim condition only. Implementation of this measure for all of the West Parking Area would require substantial portions of the landscaping to be removed in order to implement plans for the ultimate condition of the West Parking Area.)
MM 3.12-4 Prior to issuance of each building permit for each parking facility along Walnut Street; to be Implemented prior to each final building and zoning inspection, the property owner/developer shall submit plans which detail the lighting system for the parking facilities along Walnut Street. The systems shall be designed and maintained in such a manner as to conceal light sources to the extent feasible to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent uses. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed electrical engineer, with a letter from the engineer stating that, in the opinion of the engineer, this requirement has been met.

MM 3.12-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspection for the Disneyland Resort, the applicant shall participate in a landscape assessment and maintenance district, if one is established for the Anaheim Resort.

PDF 3.12-1 Prior to approval of final site plan or issuance of each building permit, whichever occurs first,
the proposed Specific Plan incorporates design guidelines as well as zoning and development standards, many of which have been designed to reduce DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-3 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
the potential visual impacts of the project and to present a visually integrated resort area, including:
 The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan provides for heavily landscaped streetscapes and gives the guidelines for trees and shrubs, light fixtures, benches, monuments, and signs located within the landscaped area.  The East and West Parking Areas and the hotel parking facilities will have landscaped setbacks from the public right-of-way and are restricted in height.  Rights-of-way will be landscaped to add to the aesthetics of the area.  The landscape treatments will vary to create distinct places visually.  The West Parking Area and hotel parking facilities will be terraced back from Walnut Street with landscaping treatments above 40 feet. In addition, canopy trees will be planted in a center median on Walnut Street, and the parkway along the street will be landscaped.
 A coordinated color theme for major street features will be incorporated into the design.
 The service areas and back-of-house areas will be screened from public view.  All rooftop equipment on buildings will be screened as per the Specific Plan.  A layered landscape treatment in the setback realm will provide screening of a 9-14 feet in height sound wall adjacent to the Southwest Parking Area.

PDF 3.8-2 Prior to approval of each grading plan or issuance of each demolition or building permits, whichever occurs first, a Construction Barrier Plan showing the location and types of barriers to be in place during grading and construction. Said plan shall provide for all construction areas to be screened from view in compliance with the City of Anaheim Municipal Code and shall include provision for the type and height of the barriers to be placed along all construction perimeters prior to the commencement of demolition, site preparation or grading, whichever occurs first.

(Note from 1997 DRSP Mitigation Monitoring Guide: Screening will be reviewed in compliance with the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan in as much as the City of Anaheim Municipal Code contains no specific requirements for screening.) (Note: Environmental equivalency approved on 3/13/97 to clarify the plan shall be submitted prior to approval of each grading plan or issuance of each demolition or building permit).

Anaheim Resort Specific Plan SEIR No. 340
According to SEIR No. 340, the ARSP area does not contain any scenic resources, nor are any scenic vistas visible from the ARSP area; therefore, no impact would occur. Future development and redevelopment associated with buildout of the ARSP area would change the existing visual character of individual areas; however, buildout of the ARSP area would create a more visually cohesive and appealing environment and impacts would be less than significant with implementation of MM 5.1-1 through MM 5.1-14.

Buildout of the C-R District could result in potential shade and shadow impacts on properties immediately adjacent to the ARSP area that would be considered significant and unavoidable.

The Anaheim City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations with regard to this DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-4 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
potential impact. SEIR No. 340 found the shade and shadow impacts associated with the specific development proposed for the PR District would be less than significant.

SEIR No. 340 Mitigation Measures
SEIR No. 340 presented mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts associated with The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Project to less than significant levels. As discussed above, despite implementation of mitigation measures, impacts related to shade and shadow effects would remain significant and unavoidable.

MM 5.1-1 Prior to final site plan approval, the property owner/developer shall submit a shade and shadow analysis to the Planning and Bu ilding Department for review and approval demonstrating that the proposed structure(s) would avoid creating significant shade and shadow impacts on adjacent land uses to the maximum extent feasible. A significant shade and shadow impact would occur when outdoor active areas (e.g., outdoor eating areas, hotel/motel swimming pools, and residential front and back yards) or structures that include sensitive uses (e.g., residences) have windows that normally receive sunlight are covered by shadows for more than 50 percent of the sunlight hours.

MM 5.1-2 Prior to issuance of building permits, all plumbing or other similar pipes and fixtures located on the exterior of the building shall be shown on plans as fully screened from view of adjacent public rights-of-way and from adjacent properties by architectural devices and/or appropriate building materials. A note indicating that these improvements will be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.

MM 5.1-3 Ongoing, the property owner/developer shall be responsible for the removal of any on-site graffiti within 24 hours of its application.

MM 5.1-4 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the location and configuration of all lighting fixtures including ground-mounted lighting fixtures utilized to accent buildings, landscape elements, or to illuminate pedestrian areas shall be shown on all Final Site Plans. All proposed surface parking area lighting fixtures shall be down-lighted with a maximum height of 12 feet adjacent to any residential properties. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded to direct lighting toward the area to be illuminated and away from adjacent residential property lines.

MM 5.1-5 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, private streets within the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area shall have street lights installed which are compatible with the design standards used for the public streets as determined by the Public Utilities Department.

MM 5.1-6 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, root and sidewalk barriers shall be provided for trees within seven feet of public sidewalks.

MM 5.1-7 Prior to final building and zoning inspections, the property owner/developer shall submit to the Planning and Building Department a letter from a licensed landscape architect certifying that all landscaping and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with landscaping plans approved in connection with the Final Site Plan.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-5 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
MM 5.1-8 Ongoing, all on-site non-Public Real m landscaping and irrigation systems, and Public Realm landscaping and irrigation systems, within area in which dedication has not been accepted by the City, shall be maintained by the property owner/developer, in compliance with City standards.

MM 5.1-9 Ongoing, any tree planted within the Setback Realm shall be replaced in a timely manner in the event that it is removed, damaged, diseased and/or dead.

MM 5.1-10 Ongoing, a licensed arborist shall be hired by the property owner/developer to be responsible for all tree trimming.

MM 5.1-11 Prior to issuance of each building permits, unless records indicate previous payment, a fee for street tree purposes shall be paid or cause to be paid to the City of Anaheim based on the length of street frontage in an amount as established by City Council resolution or credit against the fee given for City authorized improvements installed by the property owner/developer.

MM 5.1-12 Prior to issuance of each building permit, all air conditioning facilities and other roof and ground-mounted equipment shall be shown on plans as shielded from public view and the sound buffered to comply with City of Anaheim noise ordinances from any adjacent residential or transient-occupied properties. A note indicating that these improvements shall be installed prior to final building and zoning inspections shall be specifically shown on the plans submitted for building permits.

MM 5.1-13 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that the rear elevations of buildings visible from off-site areas sha ll be architecturally accented to portray a finished look.

MM 5.1-14 Prior to Final Site Plan approval, plans shall show that no shuttle/bus/vehicular drop-off areas shall be permitted in hotel/motel or vacation resort front setback area.

5.1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The following discussion details the existing conditions at the time the City published the NOP for Subsequent EIR No. 352; however, consistent with CEQA’s subsequent review standards, the previously approved projects serve as the baseline for the CEQA analysis, and Subsequent EIR No. 352 compares the effects of the Project changes to the previously approved projects to the effects of the previously analyzed and approved projects, as detailed in EIR No. 311 and SEIR No. 340.

A. Existing Conditions
The Project Site is located within a relatively flat area of the City. The entirety of the Project Site has been historically subject to grading and development, which has eliminated the area’s natural topography. Within and immediately surrounding the Project Site, there are no distinct natural landscape features or natural visual resources or vistas. Anaheim General Plan’s Green Element identifies that the contours of the Hill and Canyon Area and the Santa Ana Mountains are visible from most areas in the City; however, the relatively flat topography of the Project Site and distance from the Hill and Canyon Area and Santa Ana Mountains coupled with presence intervening structures (such as freeway overpasses, buildings, and sports venues) serve to obstruct views of these features. The Project Site is largely developed with theme park, hotel, retail, and surface and structured parking uses associated with The Disneyland Resort. Due to the size and physical DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-6 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
layout of the Project Site, the visibility of land uses is dependent on location and intervening structures. Since adoption of the DRSP in 1993 and the ARSP in 1994, the Project Site has experienced dramatic changes in the visual character of the Project Site and surrounding area, most notably the construction of Disney’s California Adventure, the Grand Californian Hotel, Downtown Disney, the Mickey and Friends and Pixar Pals parking structures, and the surface parking areas which modified views from surrounding roadways and land uses as shown in Exhibit 5.1-1a–b, Site Photographs.

Under existing conditions, development is subject to the Design Guidelines set forth in Chapter 5 of the DRSP and ARSP.

B. Regulatory Framework
Related Planning Programs
City of Anaheim General Plan
Community Design Element
The Community Design Element helps to establish a positive and strong community identity for the City of Anaheim. This element provides policy guidance in visually unifying the diverse areas of the City through carefully crafted design policies. According to the Community Design Element, the Project Site is located within The Anaheim Resort community design district. The Community Design Element of the City of Anaheim General Plan provides guidance for the City’s built environment and includes goals and policies related to aesthetics that are applicable to the Project. These goals and policies are provided in Table 5.10-1 of Section 5.10, Land Use and Planning, with a Project consistency analysis.

Green Element
The Green Element aims to use a variety of open space opportunities and resources to create a unified vision for a more beautiful, healthy city. According to the Green Element, there are no designated scenic vistas within or visible from the Project Site (Anaheim 2020). The Santa Ana River and the City’s Hill and Canyon area are located to the east and are not visible from the Project Site. The nearest open space area is located west of Walnut Avenue along an existing powerline easement immediately south of Calle de las Estrellas and currently exists as vacant land with no features of visual interest. These goals and policies are provided in Table 5.10-1 of Section 5.10, Land Use and Planning, with a Project consistency analysis.

Anaheim Resort Specific Plan
The ARSP provides regulatory and design guidance for development within the ARSP area, including Disney ARSP properties, all of whic h are located within the ARSP Commercial Recreation (C-R) District. Specifically, the ARSP includes development standards, design guidelines, and a streetscape program that promotes a consistent aesthetic appearance for the land within the ARSP area. An important objective of the ARSP is to visually tie the ARSP area to the adjacent DRSP area through the consistent use of landscape and other streetscape elements including signs, gateways, lights and other elements. Additionally, the Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map of the ARSP identifies maximum permitted structural heights for all structures within the ARSP area and surrounding areas.

Site Photograph: Disney’s California Adventure
and Grand Californian Hotel Exhibit 5.1-1a
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Grand Californian Hotel
Disney’s California Adventure

Site Photograph: Downtown Disney Exhibit 5.1-1b
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Downtown Disney
Downtown Disney Entry

Site Photograph: Mickey and Friends and Pixar Pals Parking Structures Exhibit 5.1-1c DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Pixar Pals Parking Structure
Mickey and Friends Parking Structure

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-7 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
Disneyland Resort Specific Plan
The DRSP provides regulatory and design guidance for development within the DRSP area, an approximately 489.7-acre area which comprises a significant portion of the Project Site. The DRSP is intended to establish the identity of The Disneyland Resort as a premiere destination resort by applying a unified theme throughout the DRPS area. Elements of the unified theme include consistent visual components including architecture, landscape, signs and street furnishings. The DRSP sets forth a combination of setback requirements and height restrictions to regulate effects on adjacent uses.

5.1.3 PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS
A. Methodology
Key viewsheds have been identified, and views of the Project Site have been analyzed. The potential visual changes resulting from implementation of the Project are addressed. The information presented in this section is based on field reconnaissance, review of the Project Site and aerial photographs, and review of the Project’s elements. Additionally, a Shade and Shadow Analysis has been prepared for the Project by RRM and is included as Appendix C to this Subsequent EIR.

B. Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria are derived from the City of Anaheim Environmental Checklist.

Threshold 5.1c Would the project in non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Threshold 5.1d Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Aesthetics thresholds a (scenic vista) and b (scenic resources within a scenic highway) were evaluated in Section 3.1 of the Project’s Initial Study. The Initial Study concluded that the Project would have no impact related to these thresholds. Therefore, these thresholds are not discussed in this Subsequent EIR.

C. Standard Requirements
No standard requirements for this resource topic apply to the Project.

D. Impact Analysis
Threshold 5.1c Would the project in non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-8 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
Construction
Reduced Impact from EIR No. 311; New Impact from SEIR No. 340 – Project Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation.

EIR No. 311 analyzed construction-related impacts and specifically identified that The Disneyland Resort Project would cause visual disruption during construction activities. Despite the use of construction barriers that were identified as PDF 8.3-2, EIR No. 311 found that construction- related impacts related to visual resources and aesthetics were significant and unavoidable. SEIR No. 340 did not specifically address construction-related visual impacts.

Development of the Project would involve constr uction activities that would create visual disruptions to the Project Site. Construction activities are expected to involve demolition of existing structures, landscaping, hardscape, roadways, and parking areas and would include construction of new buildings and structures, including parking lots and structures, hotels, and theme park uses. Due to the size and layout of the Project Site and existing on- and off-site development, only a portion of future construction-related activities would be visible from public viewpoints at any point in time, and these activities would be largely limited to those occurring along the Project Site’s perimeters. Consistent with the analysis contained in EIR No. 311 and with implementation of MM AES-5, the Project would include development and implementation of a Construction Barrier Plan to reduce visibility from public areas. Despite the limited visibility of future construction activities and the anticipated temporary duration associated with isolated development projects, the occurrences would be visible from surrounding public vantage points, including pedestrians and vehicles along public roadways, including Walnut Street, Ball Road, Disneyland Drive, Katella Avenue, Harbor Boulevard, Clementine Street, Manchester Avenue, Disney Way, Haster Street, and Interstate 5 (I-5). Pursuant to CEQA Section 21071 and as discussed previously, the Project Site is located in an urbanized area; therefore, the analysis for this threshold focuses on whether the Project would conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. The Project would be required to comply with all design guidelines as set forth in the ARSP, DRSP and the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, construction activities related to Project buildout would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality; a less than significant impact would occur with mitigation.

The Project would result in a less than significant impact with mitigation for construction.

Due to the change in the threshold of significance, the Project would result in reduced impacts when compared with the impact analysis in EIR No. 311, which identified significant and unavoidable construction-related visual impacts to adjacent property owners. This impact would be new when compared with the impact analysis in SEIR No. 340, which did not classify effects related to construction-related visual impacts.

Operation
Reduced Impacts from EIR No. 311; Reduced Impact from SEIR No. 340 – Project Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation.

EIR No. 311 anticipated significant and unavoidable adverse visual impacts for property owners immediately adjacent to the West Parking Area and hotel parking facilities along Walnut Street, and potentially the Future Expansion District, even with the implementation of PDF 3.12-1, PDF

3.8-1 and PDF 3.8-2, and MM 3.2-1, MM 3.2-2, and MM 3.12-1 through MM 3.12-5.

SEIR No. 340 found that future development and redevelopment associated with buildout of the ARSP area would create a more visually cohesive and appealing environment and impacts would be less than significant with implementation of MM 5.1-1 through MM 5.1-14.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-9 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
The Project Site is located in a highly developed and urbanized area and is surrounded by residential, commercial, hotel, and visitor-serving uses, as well as transportation facilities. Given that the Project Site is located in an urbanized area, the analysis for this threshold focuses on whether the Project would conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. The majority of the Project Site is zoned as DRSP SP 92-1 (The Disneyland Resort) with the Disney ARSP properties zoned as ARSP SP 92-2 (The Anaheim Resort). Within the DRSP, areas are currently divided into the following five Districts: Theme Park, Hotel, Parking, and Future Expansion Districts as well as District A. The DRSP, particularly the DRSP Zoning and Development Standards in Chapter 18.114 of the Municipal Code, specifies the land uses allowed for each District as summarized in Table 3-1 within Section 3.0, Project Description, of this Subsequent EIR. Within the ARSP, the Disney ARSP Properties are within the Commercial Recreation (C-R) District (Development Area 1) of the ARSP. The ARSP, particularly the ARSP Zoning and Development Standards in Chapter 18.116 of the Municipal Code, specifies the land uses allowed for this area as summarized previously in Table 3-1 within Section 3.0, Project Description, of this Subsequent EIR.

The Project would allow for development of currently entitled theme park uses within the existing Hotel District and Future Expansion District of the DRSP and on the Theme Park Overlays for two of the Disney ARSP Properties. Similarly, the Project would allow for currently entitled hotel uses in the existing Theme Park District and Future Expansion District of the DRSP and on Disney ARSP Properties. Although the Project does not propose additional square footage for theme park, retail entertainment, or hotel uses, the Project would allow movement of previously approved theme park square footage and hotel rooms to other areas within the Project Site, thus necessitating amendments to the DRSP and DRSP Zoning and Development Standards and the ARSP and ARSP Zoning and Development Standards, as detailed in Section 5.10, Land Use and Planning. With approval of the requested specific plan and zoning amendments, the Project would not conflict with the DRSP, ARSP or the City’s Zoning Code.

According to the Design Plan of the DRSP and Chapter 18.114 of the Anaheim Municipal Code, specific criteria are set forth to provide guidance in creating and preserving a unified resort identity. Specifically, the Design Plan details methods to achieve the following principal design objectives:
 Create visual continuity between The Disneyland Resort and the surrounding Anaheim Resort;
 Create a high quality, visually appea ling, pedestrian-oriented environment;  Protect the visual integrity of the theme parks;
 Enhance public views of the theme parks, including back-of-house uses, from public walkways and streets; and
 Enhance the interface between The Disneyland Resort and surrounding residential neighborhoods to maintain the residential character.

Additionally, the DRSP identifies design concepts that serve as policies to be implemented for all future development within the area governed by the DRSP, including providing consistency in landscape, creating large-scale design elements, enhancing public streets through the inclusion of landscaping, creating a unique character for different areas within the DRSP, enhancing the Central Core of The Anaheim Resort with special design standards, prioritizing and coordinating streetscape improvements to minimize future visual disruption and intrusion, and implementing specific design criteria for the public realm, the setback realm, and the private realm.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-10 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
The Disney ARSP Properties within the areas governed by the ARSP would also be subject to design guidelines set forth in the ARSP and Chapter 18.116 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and designated as Commercial-Recreation (C-R) District, which are intended to:
 Create a coherent, unique resort identity that reinforces the image of the Anaheim Resort as a high-quality destination resort; and
 Improve the aesthetic character of The Anaheim Resort by visually defining the boundaries with appropriate landscape treatments.

As such, the City has approved the design guidelines for the ARSP to improve the visual character of the area.

Structural Height
Future development would be required to comply with maximum height regulations and setback requirements as set forth in the DRSP and ARSP and as detailed below. As part of the Project, modifications are proposed to the existing Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map (refer to Exhibit 3-16, in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this Subsequent EIR) and Chapter 18 Zoning and Development Standards in support of the Project’s amendments to the DRSP and ARSP. Table 5.1-1, Modifications to the Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area Maximum Permitted Structural Height Map and the DRSP and ARSP Zoning and Development Standards, describes the proposed changes to the height map and zoning requirements, and identifies the location of the proposed modifications, including existing and proposed conditions and justifications for the proposed modifications. Apart from the modifications described in Table 5.1-1, the remainder of the height map will be unchanged.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-11 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
TABLE 5.1-1

MODIFICATIONS TO THE ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL RECREATION AREA MAXIMUM PERMITTED

STRUCTURAL HEIGHT MAP AND THE DRSP AND ARSP ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Location
Zoning Requirements & Existing
Conditions Proposed Conditions Justification for Proposed Modifications Disneyland Resort Specific Plan
Area A – Theme Park District
Theme Park District Maximum permitted structural height within district: 250 feet, except that one
structural thematic element may have
a height of 300 feet.

Maximum permitted structural height within
district: 250 feet, except that two structural
thematic elements may have a height of up
to 300 feet.

The proposed conditions would provide
flexibility for future Project Site utilization,
and would allow each theme park to have
one structural thematic element.

Ball Road: between
Disneyland Drive and I-5
freeway
Within back-of-house areas: as
determined by Amended Exhibit 1.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 85 feet, as
determined by Amended Exhibit 1.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
average of 30 feet with a minimum of 0
feet, provided the length of building
with a zero-foot setback shall not
exceed ten feet.

Within back-of-house areas: Removal of the
85-foot maximum height limit per Amended
Exhibit 1.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 85 feet, with 2:1 sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way: No
proposed changes.

The proposed conditions would provide
flexibility for future Project Site utilization
and improve appearance from public realm
by enhancing back-of-house and show box
areas through enhanced architectural
features. Due to the increased height along
the northern portion of the district south of
Ball Road, a 2:1 sky exposure plane would
be incorporated to decrease or maintain
generally the same level of shade and
shadow conditions on surrounding
properties and therefore the increased
height would not significantly impact
surrounding uses.

I-5 freeway Within back-of-house areas: as
determined by Amended Exhibit 1.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 85 feet, as
determined by Amended Exhibit 1.

Setbacks from public right-of-way: 10
feet.

Within back-of-house areas: Removal of the
85-foot maximum height limit per Amended
Exhibit 1.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 85 feet, with 2:1 sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way: No
proposed changes.

The proposed conditions would provide
flexibility for future Project Site utilization
and improve appearance from public realm
by enhancing back-of-house and show box
areas through enhanced architectural
features. Due to the increased height along
the I-5 freeway, a 2:1 sky exposure plane
would be incorporated to decrease or
maintain generally the same level of shade
and shadow conditions on surrounding
properties and therefore the increased
height would not significantly impact
surrounding uses.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-12 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
TABLE 5.1-1

MODIFICATIONS TO THE ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL RECREATION AREA MAXIMUM PERMITTED

STRUCTURAL HEIGHT MAP AND THE DRSP AND ARSP ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Location
Zoning Requirements & Existing
Conditions Proposed Conditions Justification for Proposed Modifications Harbor Boulevard Maximum permitted structural height at required setback: 75 feet, with sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
varies from 12 feet, 26 feet and 38
feet.

No changes proposed.

Consistent with
current requirements.

Katella Avenue Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 75 feet, with sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way: 19
feet.

No changes proposed.

Consistent with
current requirements.

Disneyland Drive Maximum permitt ed structural height at required setback: 110 feet except at
2,100 feet north of the centerline of
Katella Avenue, the maximum height
at the setback as determined by
Amended Exhibit 1, with sky exposure
plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way: 19
feet.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 85 feet between Ball Road
and 700 feet south of Ball Road, with 2:1
and 4:1 sky exposure planes and 250 feet
height between 700 feet south of Ball Road
and Katella Avenue.

Setbacks from public right-of-way: the
setback will be reduced to 11 feet between
Magic Way and the Southern California
Edison right-of-way, which is approximately
125 feet north of the Katella Avenue right-of-
way.

The proposed conditions would provide
flexibility for future Project Site utilization.

Since properties on both sides of
Disneyland Drive within Area A between
Ball Road and Katella Ave are owned or
leased by Disney, the proposed conditions
would not result in a significant impact to
surrounding uses. Due to the increased
height along the northern portion of the
district south of Ball Road, 2:1 and 4:1 sky
exposure planes would be incorporated to
decrease or maintain generally the same
level of shade and shadow conditions.

Area B – Theme Park District (Former Hotel District)
Theme Park District Maximum permitted structural height within district: ranges from 75 feet to
135 feet, as determined by Amended
Exhibit 1.

Maximum permitted structural height within
district: 250 feet, except that two structural
thematic elements may have a height of up
to 300 feet.

Height restrictions on Area B – Theme Park
District (Former Hotel District) were
intended to protect views from the Theme
Park District. With the flexibility for theme
park uses within this district, there would be
less concern for visual intrusion into the
Theme Park District by non-themed
architecture.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-13 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
TABLE 5.1-1

MODIFICATIONS TO THE ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL RECREATION AREA MAXIMUM PERMITTED

STRUCTURAL HEIGHT MAP AND THE DRSP AND ARSP ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Location
Zoning Requirements & Existing
Conditions Proposed Conditions Justification for Proposed Modifications Katella Avenue Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 75 feet, with 2:1 Sky
Exposure Plane.

Minimum structural setbacks from
public right-of-way: 19 feet.

No changes proposed.

Consistent with
current requirements.

Disneyland Drive Maximum permitt ed structural height at required setback: 110 feet.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
19 feet.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 250 feet.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
the
setback will be reduced to 11 feet between
Magic Way and the Southern California
Edison right-of-way, which is approximately
125 feet north of the Katella Avenue right-of-
way.

The proposed conditions would provide
flexibility for future Project Site utilization.

Since properties on both sides of
Disneyland Drive within Area B are owned
or leased by Disney, the proposed
conditions would not result in a significant
impact to surrounding uses.

Between Disneyland Drive and Walnut
Street, three Disneyland Hotel buildings
were previously constructed in this area at
heights ranging between 252 and 282 feet
before the City adopted the DRSP. All new
construction would comply with the revised
height limits.

Walnut Street Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 40 feet, with sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way: 30
feet.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 50 feet, with 2:1 and 4:1
sky exposure planes.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
50 feet,
however, fences are permitted at a minimum
setback of 30 feet.

The proposed conditions would provide
flexibility for future Project Site utilization.

Due to the increased height of Area B, 2:1
and 4:1 sky exposure planes would be
incorporated to decrease or maintain
generally the same level of shade and
shadow conditions on surrounding
properties and the increased height would
not result in a significant impact to
surrounding uses.

Magic Way Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: varies, as
determined by Amended Exhibit 1.

Setbacks from right-of-way: 10 feet
minimum if the height of the structure
is 35 feet or less or 20 feet minimum if
Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 250 feet.

Setbacks from right-of-way: 10 feet minimum
until City abandons public right-of-way; once
abandoned, no setback required.

The proposed conditions would provide
flexibility for future Project Site utilization.

Since properties on both sides of Magic
Way are owned or leased by Disney and
the City would abandon Magic Way right-
of-way, the proposed conditions would not
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-14 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
TABLE 5.1-1

MODIFICATIONS TO THE ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL RECREATION AREA MAXIMUM PERMITTED

STRUCTURAL HEIGHT MAP AND THE DRSP AND ARSP ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Location
Zoning Requirements & Existing
Conditions Proposed Conditions Justification for Proposed Modifications the height of the structure is greater
than 35 feet.
result in a significant impact to surrounding
uses.

Area C – Southeast District (Former Future Expansion District) Southeast District Maximum permitted structural height
within district: varies from 115 feet to
190 feet, as determined by Amended
Exhibit 1.

Maximum permitted structural height within
district: 170 feet.

Height restrictions on current Southeast
District were intended to protect views from
the Theme Park District. With theme park
and mixed-use development allowed on-
site with the Project, there would be less
concern for visual intrusion into the Theme
Park District by non-themed architecture.

Katella Avenue Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 75 feet, with sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way: 11
feet.

No changes proposed.

Consistent with
current requirements.

Haster Street Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 75 feet, with sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
20 feet minimum, if the height of the
structure is 75 feet or less or 30 feet
minimum, if the height of the structure
is greater than 75 feet.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 75 feet, with a 2:1 sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way: 30 feet.

Height restrictions on the Southeast District
were intended to protect views from the
Theme Park District. With theme park and
mixed-use development allowed on-site
with the Project, there would be less
concern for visual intrusion into the Theme
Park District by non-themed architecture.

The sky exposure plane would protect the
view shed and provide buffering adjacent to
existing residential uses, while providing
flexibility for a future parking structure.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-15 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
TABLE 5.1-1

MODIFICATIONS TO THE ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL RECREATION AREA MAXIMUM PERMITTED

STRUCTURAL HEIGHT MAP AND THE DRSP AND ARSP ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Location
Zoning Requirements & Existing
Conditions Proposed Conditions Justification for Proposed Modifications Adjacent to Residential
Zone
Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 50 feet, with sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks adjacent to Residential Zone:

50 feet.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 75 feet, with 2:1 sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from adjacent Residential Zone:

no changes proposed.

The sky exposure plane would protect the
view shed and provide buffering adjacent to
existing residential uses, while providing
flexibility for a future parking structure.

Adjacent to commercial
lots wholly outside the
Specific Plan area
Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: as determined by
Amended Exhibit 1.

Setbacks adjacent to commercial lots
outside the Specific Plan area: 10 feet.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 140 feet, with 2:1 sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks adjacent to commercial lots
outside the Specific Plan area: no changes
proposed.

The proposed condition would remain
relatively close in height in comparison to
the adjacent commercial lots outside of the
Specific Plan area. A 2:1 sky exposure
plane would be incorporated to decrease or
maintain generally the same level of shade
and shadow conditions on surrounding
properties the increased height would not
result in a significant impact to surrounding
uses.

Anaheim Resort Specific Plan
Area D – Theme Park West Overlay (Paradise Pier Hotel) and underlying C-R District Theme Park West
Overlay
Maximum permitted structural height
within district: ranges from 110 feet to
120 feet, as determined by the
Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area
Maximum Permitted Structural Height
Map.

Maximum permitted structural height within
district: 250 feet.

The proposed conditions would provide
flexibility for future Project Site utilization.

Since the properties surrounding Area D
are owned or leased by Disney, the
proposed conditions would not result in a
significant impact to surrounding uses.

Disneyland Drive Maximum permitt ed structural height at required setback: 110 feet.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
19 feet.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 250 feet.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
no
changes proposed.

The proposed conditions would provide
flexibility for future Project Site utilization.

Since the properties surrounding Area D
are owned or leased by Disney, the
proposed conditions would not result in a
significant impact to surrounding uses.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-16 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
TABLE 5.1-1

MODIFICATIONS TO THE ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL RECREATION AREA MAXIMUM PERMITTED

STRUCTURAL HEIGHT MAP AND THE DRSP AND ARSP ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Location
Zoning Requirements & Existing
Conditions Proposed Conditions Justification for Proposed Modifications The existing hotel is 286 feet in height and
was constructed prior to the City’s adoption
of the ARSP. All new construction would
comply with the revised height limits.

Area E – Theme Park East Overlay (Toy Story Parking Lot) and underlying C-R District Theme Park East Overlay Maximum permitted structural height within district: ranges from 140 feet to
200 feet, as determined by the
Anaheim Commercial Recreation Area
Maximum Permitted Structural Height
Map.

Maximum permitted structural height within
district: 170 feet, except that one structural
thematic element may have a height of up to
200 feet.

Height restrictions on Theme Park East
Overlay were intended to protect views
from the Theme Park District. With theme
park and mixed-use development allowed
on-site in the future, there would be less
concern for visual intrusion into the Theme
Park District by non-themed architecture.

The maximum allowed height of the
proposed conditions would be generally
similar to or less than existing conditions for
some intervals, therefore the proposed
conditions would not result in a significant
impact to surrounding uses.

Harbor Boulevard Maximum permitted structural height at required setback: varies from buildings
up to 35 feet, 35-75 feet, or greater
than 75.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
26 feet.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 75 feet, with a 2:1 sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from public right-of-way:
no
changes proposed.

A 2:1 sky exposure plane would be
incorporated along Harbor Boulevard and
at the northern internal property line
adjacent to Harbor Boulevard to protect the
properties around the area. With the
flexibility to have mixed-use and theme
park development in this location, 360-
Degree-Architecture would be implemented
to ensure sufficient screening from adjacent
properties.

Interior lots adjacent to
Residential Zone or
Mobile Home Park (MHP)
Overlay
Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: Height of any
building or structure within 150 feet of
residential zone or MHP Overlay shall
not exceed a height equal to one-half
the distance from said building or
structure to said zone or overlay
boundary.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 50 feet, with a 2:1 sky
exposure plane.

Setbacks from adjacent Residential Zone:

50 feet, with a 2:1 sky exposure plane.

With the flexibility to have mixed-use and
theme park development in this location, a
2:1 sky exposure plane would be
incorporated along interior lots to protect
the Residential Zone and 360-Degree-
Architecture would be implemented to
ensure sufficient screening from adjacent
properties.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-17 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
TABLE 5.1-1

MODIFICATIONS TO THE ANAHEIM COMMERCIAL RECREATION AREA MAXIMUM PERMITTED

STRUCTURAL HEIGHT MAP AND THE DRSP AND ARSP ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Location
Zoning Requirements & Existing
Conditions Proposed Conditions Justification for Proposed Modifications Setbacks adjacent to Residential Zone:
equal to two times the height of the
building or structure within 150 feet of
residential zone.

Interior lots adjacent to
commercial area
Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: ranges from 140-150
feet at the northwest corner and 190-
200 feet at the southwest corner, as
determined by the Anaheim
Commercial Recreation Area
Maximum Permitted Structural Height
Map.

Setbacks adjacent to commercial area:
10 feet.

Maximum permitted structural height at
required setback: 140 feet, with a 2:1 sky
exposure plane for parcels to the northwest
corner. 170 feet for parcels to the southwest
corner.

Setbacks adjacent to commercial area: no
changes.

The proposed condition would remain
relatively close in height in comparison to
the adjacent commercial lots. A 2:1 sky
exposure plane would be incorporated to
decrease or maintain generally the same
level of shade and shadow conditions to
surrounding properties and would not result
in a significant impact to surrounding uses.

DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-18 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
As discussed in the table, the proposed modifications would alter the existing visual character of the Project Site through modifications of maximum structural heights and setbacks from existing conditions and what was previously approved for the Project Site; however, these changes would contribute to a more uniform visual appearance of future development on the Project Site and would implement design elements set forth in the DRSP and ARSP with the specific intent to minimize visual intrusion to neighboring properties. These design elements include height limits, minimum setbacks, a landscape palette, architectural elements, and screening for certain uses.

Therefore, the Project would implement MM AES-1, MM AES-5, MM AES-7, MM AES-8, and MM AES-10 related to screening or locating certain uses out of view; MM AES-4, MM AES-12 through MM AES-17, and MM LU-3 related to landscaping requirements, including trees; MM AES-6 and MM AES-9 related to architectural elements and visual integration; and MM AES-11 requiring prompt removal of graffiti.

Shade and Shadow
EIR No. 311 analyzed potential shade and shadow impacts on surrounding uses and found no significant impacts would occur. SEIR No. 340 found that buildout of the C-R District could result in potential shade and shadow impacts on properties immediately adjacent to the ARSP area that would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Relative to the built environment, shade and shadow pertains to the blockage of direct sunlight by structures, which may or may not affect adjacent properties. Shading is an important issue because the users of certain land uses, such as residential, recreational, and pedestrian areas, have expectations for periods of direct sunlight and warmth from the sun. Factors that influence the extent of range of shading include season, time of day, weather (i.e., sunny or cloudy), structure height, structure bulk and scale, spacing between structures; and tree cover. The longest shadows are cast during the winter months, when the sun orientation is lowest, and the shortest shadows are cast during the summer months, when the sun orientation is highest.

Shadows are longer in the early morning and late afternoon.

A Shade and Shadow Analysis has been prepared for the Project by RRM and is included as Appendix C to this Subsequent EIR. Consistent with typical shade and shadow study approaches, the Project’s Shade and Shadow Analysis analyzed both the existing conditions and the proposed conditions were conducted for the Winter Solstice (December 21), or the shortest daylight day of a year, and the Summer Solstice (June 21), or the longest day of the year. Daytime intervals of 8:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., and 4:00 p.m. were used in the analysis to visually portray morning, mid- day, and late afternoon shade and shadow conditions within the Project Site and surrounding areas. The analysis was conducted for all areas that have the potential to impact shade-sensitive uses, including outdoor active areas (e.g., outdoor eating areas, hotel/motel swimming pools, and residential front and back yards) or structures that include sensitive uses (e.g., residences).

The following compares the shade and shadow conditions of the proposed conditions for the Project Site and surrounding areas relative to the existing conditions. Exhibit 5.1-2, Overview Map, provides a visual overview of the different areas evaluated for shade and shadow.

DRSP
Theme Park District
Existing and proposed conditions for the Theme Park District for the Winter Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-3 and 5.1-4, respectively. Existing and proposed conditions for the Theme Park District for the Summer Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-5 and 5.1-6, respectively. Modeled structure heights for the existing conditions are based on the currently approved height map; Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Overview Map Exhibit 5.1-2
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ
'563

Area 1. The Original Theme Park District
Area 2. Expanded Theme Park District (Former Hotel District) Area 3. Parking District (West Parking Area)
Area 4. Parking District (East Parking Area)
Area 5. Southeast District (Former Future Expansion District) $QDKHLP5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ
$563

Area 6. Theme Park West Overlay (Paradise Pier Hotel)
Area 7. Theme Park East Overlay (Toy Story Parking Lot) Area 8. Parking Overlay (Manchester Cast Member Lot)
Area 9. Parking Overlay (Harbor Cast Member Lot)
2 4
8 5
7 6
3 9
1 1
Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

Manchester Ave.Manchester Ave.

Clementine St.Clementine St.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Katella Ave.Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

I-5I-5 Disney WayDisney Way
Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Katttttttttteeeeeeeee
aaaa AAAAAAAAAAvvvvvve.

Kaaaaaaaaaaaatttttttttttttteeeeeeeeeeeellllllllllllllllllllllllllaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa AAAAAAAAAAAAAAvvvvvve.

AnaheimConvention
Center
Disneyland Theme Park
California AdventureTheme Park
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Theme Park District for the Winter Solstice 'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 0’ 1600’800’400’ 3200’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 800’
30
Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Harbor BlvdHarbor Blvd
Harbor BlvdHarbor Blvd
Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.
$0

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
30
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

I-5I-5
I-5I-5
··
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
··
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
··
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
·· ·· ··
·· ·· ··
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
Exhibit 5.1-3
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Conditions for the Theme Park District for the Winter Solstice Exhibit 5.1-4 'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

SHADE AND SHADOW

STUDY AREA
0’ 1600’800’400’ 3200’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 800’
30
Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.
$0
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
4:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

I-5I-5
I-5I-5
I-5I-5
··
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
··
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
··
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
30
··
··
··
··
··

Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Theme Park District for the Summer Solstice Exhibit 5.1-5 'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.
$0
30
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Conditions for the Theme Park District for the Summer Solstice 'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 0’ 1600’800’400’ 3200’
SCALE 1” = 800’
JUNE 2023
30
Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.
30
$0
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

I-5I-5
I-5I-5
I-5I-5
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
··

··

··

··
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
··
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
··
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
ElementElement
8S7R·8S7R·

SHADE AND SHADOW

STUDY AREA
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
4:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Exhibit 5.1-6
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-19 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
modeled structure heights for the proposed conditions are based on the proposed changes to the height map. As shown for the proposed conditions of the current Theme Park District, the maximum allowed massing envelopes under the proposed conditions would be similar to or extend minimally further than that of the existing conditions for the Winter Solstice and Summer Solstice.

As shown for the Winter Solstice proposed conditions, the shade and shadow conditions for the 8:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. intervals for the Winter Solstice proposed conditions would remain similar to or less than existing conditions while the 4 PM interval is similar to or less than Existing Conditions in extent to the east but extends minimally further to the north/northeast into existing commercial, hotel, and residential uses north of the Ball Road and Harbor Boulevard intersection.

As shown for the Summer Solstice proposed conditions, the shade and shadow conditions for the 8:00 a.m., 12 PM, and 4 PM intervals are similar to or less than Existing Conditions.

For the Theme Park District area located west of Disneyland Drive and south of Ball Road, no changes are proposed to the existing conditions and therefore the shade and shadow conditions would remain the same under the proposed conditions.

Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District)
Existing and proposed conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District) for the Winter Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-7 and 5.1-8, respectively. Existing and proposed conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District for the Summer Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-9 and 5.1-10, respectively. For the proposed conditions of the expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District), the maximum allowed massing envelopes under the proposed conditions would be similar to the Existing Conditions for the Winter Solstice and Summer Solstice, while slightly exceeding the 8 AM interval for Existing Conditions for the Winter Solstice and at the 4 PM interval for Existing Conditions for the Winter Solstice and Summer Solstice. For the Winter Solstice Proposed Conditions, the shade and shadow conditions for the 12 PM interval remain similar to or less than Existing Conditions to the west, while the 8 AM interval extends further to the north into the existing residential areas to the west and the 4 PM interval extends further into the existing hotel and theme park areas to the east. The extension of the 8 AM interval to the north along Walnut Street under the Winter Solstice Proposed Conditions is due to the modification of the height requirements and removal of setback requirements along Magic Way, which is to be abandoned as part of DisneylandForward. For the Summer Solstice Proposed Conditions, the shade and shadow conditions for the 8 AM and 12 PM intervals are similar to or less than Existing Conditions, while the 4 PM interval extends further into the existing hotel and theme park areas to the east.

To minimize increases in shade and shadow from the Existing Conditions to the Proposed Conditions, a 2:1 sky exposure plane was incorporated along Walnut Street up to 140-feet in height. An additional 4:1 sky exposure plane was also incorporated beginning at 140-feet in height and continuing up to 250-feet in height.

Parking District (West Parking Area)
Existing and proposed conditions for the Parking District (West Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-11 and 5.1-12, respectively. Existing and proposed conditions for the West Parking Area for the Summer Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-13 and 5.1-14, respectively. For the West Parking Area, no changes are proposed to the existing conditions and therefore the shade and shadow conditions would remain the same under the proposed Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District) for the Winter Solstice 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Walnut St.Walnut St.
$0
3030
Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Walnut St.Walnut St.
··
··
··
··
··
··

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
Exhibit 5.1-7
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District) for the Winter Solstice Exhibit 5.1-8 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’

SHADE AND SHADOW

STUDY AREA

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5 1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Walnut St.Walnut St.
$0
··
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
··

··

··

··
·· ··
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
··

··

30
30
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District) for the Summer Solstice Exhibit 5.1-9 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Walnut St.Walnut St.
$0 3030
Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Walnut St.Walnut St.
··
··
··
··
··
··

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Conditions for the Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District) for the Summer Solstice Exhibit 5.1-10 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Walnut St.Walnut St.
3030
Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Walnut St.Walnut St.
$0
Walnut St.Walnut St.
·· ·· ··
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R·
Thematic Thematic
Element Element
8S7R·8S7R···

··

··

··
··

··

SHADE AND SHADOW

STUDY AREA
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
4:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Parking District (West Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice Exhibit 5.1-11 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. $0
30
30
·· ·· ··
Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Conditions for the Parking District (West Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 30
30
$0
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

SHADE AND SHADOW

STUDY AREA
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Exhibit 5.1-12
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Parking District (West Parking Area) for the Summer Solstice Exhibit 5.1-13 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. $0
30
30
·· ·· ··
Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Conditions for the Parking District (West Parking Area) for the Summer Solstice Exhibit 5.1-14 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.

Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

Disneyland Dr.Disneyland Dr.Magic WayMagic Way
Ball Rd.Ball Rd.

Walnut St.Walnut St.

SHADE AND SHADOW

STUDY AREA
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
DisneylandForward
Draft Subsequent EIR No. 352

5.1-20 Section 5.1 – Aesthetics
conditions. This was evaluated herein due to proximity to off-site uses and to provide public disclosure that no changes would occur from currently entitled uses.

Parking District (East Parking Area)
Existing and proposed conditions for the Parking District (East Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-15 and 5.1-16, respectively. Existing and proposed conditions for the East Parking Area for the Summer Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-17 and 5.1-18, respectively. For the East Parking Area, no changes are proposed to the existing conditions and therefore the shade and shadow conditions would remain the same under the proposed conditions. This was evaluated herein due to proximity to off-site uses and to provide public disclosure that no changes would occur from currently entitled uses.

Southeast District (former Future Expansion District)
Existing and proposed conditions for the Southeast District (former Future Expansion District) for the Winter Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-19 and 5.1-20, respectively. Existing and proposed conditions for the Southeast District for the Summer Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-21 and 5.1-22, respectively. For the proposed conditions of the Southeast District (former Future Expansion District), the maximum allowed massing envelopes under the proposed conditions would extend minimally further into the surrounding area but for some intervals would be less than the existing conditions for the Winter Solstice, while remaining similar to or less than the existing conditions for the Summer Solstice. As shown for the Winter Solstice proposed conditions, the shade and shadow conditions for the 8:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., and 4:00 p.m. intervals would extend minimally further into the existing, adjacent commercial, hotel, and residential uses, while in some areas would extend less into residential uses than the existing conditions. As shown for the Summer Solstice proposed conditions, the shade and shadow conditions for the 8:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., and 4:00 p.m. intervals would be similar to or less than the existing conditions.

ARSP
Theme Park West Overlay (Paradise Pier Hotel)
Existing and proposed conditions for the Theme Park West Overlay (Paradise Pier Hotel) for the Winter Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-23 and 5.1-24, respectively. Existing and proposed conditions for the Theme Park West Overlay (Paradise Pier Hotel) for the Summer Solstice are shown in Exhibits 5.1-25 and 5.1-26, respectively. For the proposed conditions for the Theme Park West Overlay, the maximum allowed massing envelopes under the proposed conditions would extend further than existing conditions for both Winter Solstice and Summer Solstice. For the majority of shade and shadow increases from the Existing Conditions to the Proposed Conditions, the increases in shade and shadow would extend over Disney properties. However, the increase in shade and shadow would also extend further to the west into the existing residential uses but would not be greater than identified under Area 2) Expanded Theme Park District (former Hotel District). As shown for the Winter Solstice proposed conditions, the shade and shadow conditions for the 8:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., and 4:00 p.m. intervals would extend further into the existing hotel, residential, surface parking, and theme park uses to the west, north, and east. As shown for the Summer Solstice proposed conditions, the shade and shadow conditions for the 12:00 p.m. interval would be similar to existing conditions, while the 8:00 a.m., and 4:00 p.m. intervals would be similar to or less than existing conditions.

Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Parking District (East Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice Exhibit 5.1-15 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5 1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION $0 3030
Disney WayDisney Way
Disney WayDisney Way
Disney WayDisney Way
Clementine St.Clementine St.

Clementine St.Clementine St.

Clementine S t.Clementine St.

Manchester Ave.Manchester Ave.

Manchest
er Ave.

Manchester Ave.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

I-5I-5
I-5I-5
I-5I-5
·· ·· ··

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Conditions for the Parking District (East Parking Area) for the Winter Solstice Exhibit 5.1-16 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. $0 3030
Disney WayDisney Way
Disney WayDisney Way
Disney WayDisney Way
Clementine St.Clementine St.

Clementine St.Clementine St.

Manchester Ave.Manchester Ave.

Manchester
Ave.

Manchester Ave.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

I-5I-5
I-5I-5
I-5I-5
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG

SHADE AND SHADOW

STUDY AREA

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Parking District (East Parking Area) for the Summer Solstice Exhibit 5.1-17 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5 1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION $0
3030
Disney WayDisney Way
Disney WayDisney Way
Disney WayDisney Way
Clementine St.Clementine St.

Clementine St.Clementine St.

Clementin e St.Clementine St.

Manchester Ave.Manchester Ave.

Manch
ester Ave.

Manchester Ave.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

I-5I-5
I-5I-5
I-5I-5
·· ·· ··

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Conditions for the Parking District (East Parking Area) for the Summer Solstice Exhibit 5.1-18 0’ 1000’500’250’ 1500’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 500’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

Clementine St.Clementine St.

Clementine S t.Clementine St.

Manchester Ave.Manchester Ave.

Manch
ester Ave.

Manchester Ave.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

I-5I-5
I-5I-5
I-5I-5
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG
1R&KDQJHV1R&KDQJHV
3URSRVHG3URSRVHG

SHADE AND SHADOW

STUDY AREA

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Southeast District (former Future Expansion District) for the Winter Solstice 0’ 1200’600’300’ 1800’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 600’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. $0
30
30
Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Clementine St.Clementine St.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

Haster St.Haster St.

Haster St.Haster St.
··
··

·
·
··
··

·
·
··
··

·
·

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)
Exhibit 5.1-19
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Proposed Conditions for the Southeast District (former Future Expansion District) for the Winter Solstice Exhibit 5.1-20 0’ 1200’600’300’ 1800’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 600’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. $0
30
30
Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Katella Ave.Katella Ave.

Clementine St.Clementine St.

Harbor Blvd.Harbor Blvd.

Haster St.Haster St.

Haster St.Haster St.
·· ·· ··

SHADE AND SHADOW

STUDY AREA
2:1 SKY EXPOSURE PLANE
(10’ HEIGHT CONTOURS)

EXTENT OF

SHADE/SHADOW
Source: RRM Design Group, 2023
DisneylandForward Subsequent EIR
Existing Conditions for the Southeast District (former Future Expansion District) for the Summer Solstice Exhibit 5.1-21 0’ 1200’600’300’ 1800’
JUNE 2023
SCALE 1” = 600’
'LVQH\ODQG5HVRUW6SHFLÀF3ODQ

SHADE AND SHADOW STUDY
NOTE: REFER TO TABLE 5.1-1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. $0
30
30
··
··

·
·
··
··

·
·
··
··

·
·
Clementine St.Clementine St.

Anaheim City CouncilApril 16, 2024

Anaheim City Council
April 16, 2024