75C - PH - THE BOWERY - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Response 32: See Response to Comment 20 above. Comment 33: The comment asserts that the pass -by trip percentages utilized in the air quality model are altered without justification. Response 33: See Response to Comment 18 above. Comment 34: The comment asserts that the Draft EIR fails to adopt feasible mitigation measures related to construction air quality emissions and provides a list of measures to alleviate the significant impact of construction -related emissions that the commenter assumes to occur based on the commenters modeling of emissions. Response 34: As described in Section 5.2, Air Qualify, of the Draft EIR emissions from operation of the proposed Project would exceed the threshold of significance for VOCs. The majority of VOC emissions would be derived from consumer products and mobile activity. Consumer products include cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics and toiletries, the use of which cannot be controlled by the City. Likewise, vehicular emissions cannot be controlled by either the Project applicant or the City. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce VOC emissions to below the SCAQMD threshold. Therefore, operational emissions would be significant and unavoidable. The commenter suggests various mitigation measures are available to reduce operational emissions in comment 44, however, none of the suggested measures are quantifiable or enforceable, and none would ha Comment 35: The comment assert that DPM emissions and health risk emissions are inadequately evaluated. Response 35: See Response to Comment 11. Comment 36: The comment provides a screening level assessment of DPM emissions and cancer risks from the Project. Response 36: See Response to Comment 11. Comment 37: The comment asserts that the Draft EIR fails to adopt feasible mitigation measures related to greenhouse gas emissions and provides a list of measures to alleviate the significant impact of the Project. Response 37: As described in Section 5.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of the Draft EIR the Project incorporates various sustainable design features that would reduce GHG emissions and would be developed pursuant to the 2019 Title 24/CalGreen standards. However, there are no feasible Project measures that would reduce vehicular emissions, and approximately 60 percent of the GHG emissions would be generated by Project mobile sources (vehicle trips) (Draft EIR page 5.6-14). Thus, neither the Project Applicant nor the City of Santa Ana can substantively or materially affect reductions in Project mobile -source emissions. The measures recommended by this comment would not meaningfully reduce GHG emissions substantively, nor has the commenter provided any evidence how these measures would reduce GHG emissions associated with this project. Comment 38: The comment states that mitigation measures requiring the implementation of diesel control measures to further reduce construction emissions should be implemented. 75C-204