Item 26 - Public Hearing Regarding Bristol Project

Home Browse Search

Response to Letter L9: Kelly Lumen, dated August 11, 2024 Comment L9.1: This comment states that the commenter is opposed to the zone change that would allow for mixed -use development and a hotel in Santa Ana and that the change would have significant negative impacts on the community that must be carefully considered. Response L9.1: The comment does not raise any specific environmental concern with the analysis within the Draft SEIR and is introductory in nature. Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the Draft and Final SEIR discussed all reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of the proposed Project, including effects on the surrounding community. Therefore, no further response is warranted. Comment L9.2: This comment states that the Project would likely displace existing local businesses, which could result in a loss of diversity in the commercial landscape, leading to economic instability. Response L9.2: The comment does not raise any specific environmental concern with the analysis within the Draft SEIR. CEQA is an environmental protection statute that is concerned with physical changes to the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15358(b)). The environment includes land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance (CEQA Guidelines Section 15360). The Project's potential economic and social effects are not considered effects on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(e) and 151 31(a)). Thus, consistent with CEQA, the Draft SEIR includes an analysis of the Project's potentially significant physical impacts on the environment and does not include discussion of local businesses or economic impacts. This comment will be forwarded to City decision makers as part of the staff report for the Project. Comment L9.3: This comment states that this area of Santa Ana already experiences significant traffic and congestion issues and the Project will lead to longer commute times, increased pollution, and a general decline in quality of life for residents. Response L9.3: The comment does not raise any specific environmental concern with the analysis within the Draft SEIR. Draft SEIR Section 5.13 Transportation, details that Senate Bill (SB) 743 changes include the elimination of auto delay, LOS, and similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as the basis for determining significant impacts. As part of the 2019 amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines, SB 743 directed that the revised CEQA Guidelines "shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses" (Public Resources Code Section 21099[b][1 ]); and that "automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment" (Public Resources Code Section 21099[b][2]). As such, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(2), the SEIR focuses on analysis of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) criteria and improvements to the circulation system along the Project's frontage to accommodate buildout of the proposed Project, pursuant to the City's recent General Plan Update. Further yet, the SEIR is not required to analyze impacts related to traffic congestion. Nevertheless, a Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared for the Project and is publicly available on the City's Project website. In regard to increased pollution, the Draft SEIR properly analyzed potential effects related to increased air quality emissions associated with the proposed Project. As discussed, emissions from operation of the proposed Project would exceed SCAQMD's thresholds for NOx and ROG after implementation of existing regulations and mitigation. The majority of NOx emissions are from vehicles and the majority of ROG emissions would be derived from consumer products, neither of which the Project applicant nor the City have the ability to reduce emissions of. Therefore, both NOx and ROG emissions from implementation of the proposed Project would result in both a project level and a cumulatively considerable significant and unavoidable impact. Hence, Impacts AQ-1 and AQ-2 would be significant and unavoidable after mitigation. Impact AQ-3 would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation that requires CARB Tier 4 Final off -road construction equipment and construction exhaust and dust control, as detailed previously. Thus, impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations would be less than significant with implementation of existing regulations and incorporation of mitigation. M