HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-077 - Approving an Addendum to the Final Environmental Imapactjmf 11/15/17
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-077
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT /
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 89-01 FOR THE
BRISTOL STREET WIDENING PROJECT PERTAINING TO
THE INTERSECTION OF BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY
LANE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and
declares as follows:
A. On November 19, 1990, the City Council approved the Final Environmental
Impact Statement / Environmental Impact Report No. 89-01 ("FEIS/EIR") for the
widening of a 3.9 -mile segment of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory
Lane, hereinafter referred to as the "Project".
B. The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") requires that if there are
minor technical changes or additions to a project, and no new or substantially
more severe significant effects result, an addendum to an approved EIR must be
prepared.
C. The City Council has previously considered and approved various addenda to
the FEIS/EIR, most recently in 2015 for design modifications to Phase IV of the
Project, between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place.
D.To address minor design modifications to the Project concerning the Bristol
Street and Memory Lane Intersection, a further Addendum has been prepared, a
copy of which is attached as Exhibit A ("Addendum").
E. On December 5, 2017, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15164,
the City Council considered for approval this Addendum to the FEIS/EIR.
Section 2. The City Council previously approved and adopted the FEIS/EIR
for the Project. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the
Addendum to the FEIS/EIR was prepared for the Project. Based upon the studies, the
City Council determines that there are no new significant impacts or any increases in
the severity of the impacts previously identified in the original FEIS/EIR. The City
Council hereby approves the Addendum to the FEIS/EIR, attached hereto as Exhibit A,
and incorporated as though fully set forth herein.
Resolution No. 2017-077
Page 1 of 4
Section 3. These decisions are based upon the Request for Council Action
dated December 5, 2017, and exhibits attached thereto; the public comments; and the
Final Environmental Impact Study / Environmental Impact Report No. 89-01, all of which
are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 4. The City Council directs that any necessary Notice of Determination
be prepared and filed with the Clerk of the County of Orange in the matter as required
by law.
Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by
the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting
this Resolution.
ADOPTED this 5th day of December, 2017.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
By:
AA M. Funk
Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
Resolution No. 2017-077
Page 2 of 4
Benavidez, Sarmiento Solorio Villegas (4)
Martinez (1)
Sarmiento (1)
jmf 11/15/17
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, Maria D. Huizar, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the
attached Resolution No. 2017-077 to be the original resolution adopted by the City
Council of the City of Santa Ana on December 5, 2017.
Date: r ; A,";, -
Maria D. Huizar
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
Resolution No. 2017-077
Page 3 of 4
Refer to Laserfiche
for "Exhibit A"
Resolution No. 2017-077
Page 4 of 4
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane
Intersection Improvements
Project No. 17-6883
Lead Agency:
CITY OF SANTA ANA
PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, California 92702
Contact Kenny Nguyen
714.647.5632
Prepared by:
MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500
Sante Ana, California 92707
Contact Ms. Kristen Bogue
949.472.3505
Approved on December 5, 2017
JN 161391
This document is designed for double -sided printing to conserve natural resources.
3.2
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
_
--
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements
- Project No. 17-6883
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Biological Resources...........................................................................................................
1.0 INTRODUCTION
......................................................................................................................1-1
Cultural Resources..............................................................................................................
1.1
Purpose of an Addendum....................................................................................................
1-2
1.2
Project Location..................................................................................................................
1-3
1.3
Project Background.............................................................................................................
1-6
3-13
1.3.1 Approved 1990 Final EIR/EIS...............................................................................1-6
Hydrology and Water Quality...........................................................................................3-17
1.4
Project Description..............................................................................................................
1-8
3-19
1.4.1 Proposed Intersection Improvements.....................................................................
1-8
3-20
1.4.2 Proposed Property Acquisition..............................................................................
1-8
3-20
1.4.3 Changes as Compared to the Approved Project ...................................................
1-10
1.4.4 Construction Timeframe......................................................................................
1-10
1.5
Discretionary Actions........................................................................................................
1-12
1.6
Clarifications to the Addendum Upon Certification.........................................................
1-12
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST.........................................................................................2-1
2.1
Background.........................................................................................................................2-1
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES................................................................................3-1
3.1
Aesthetics............................................................................................................................
3-1
3.2
Agricultural and Forestry Resources...................................................................................
3-3
3.3
Air Quality..........................................................................................................................3-4
3.4
Biological Resources...........................................................................................................
3-7
3.5
Cultural Resources..............................................................................................................
3-8
3.6
Geology and Soils...............................................................................................................3-9
3-27
3.7
Greenhouse Gas Emissions...............................................................................................
3-12
3.8
Hazards and Hazardous Materials.....................................................................................
3-13
3.9
Hydrology and Water Quality...........................................................................................3-17
3.10
Land Use and Planning.....................................................................................................
3-19
3.11
Mineral Resources.............................................................................................................
3-20
3.12
Noise.................................................................................................................................
3-20
3.13
Population and Housing....................................................................................................
3-22
3.14
Public Services..................................................................................................................3-23
3.15
Recreation.........................................................................................................................
3-24
3.16
Transportation/Traffic.......................................................................................................3-25
3.17
Tribal Cultural Resources.................................................................................................
3-27
3.18
Utilities and Service Systems............................................................................................
3-28
3.19
Mandatory Findings of Significance.................................................................................
3-30
4.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................4-1
APPENDICES:
Appendix A Modified Initial Study Checklist
Final I December 2017 1 Table of Contents
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Imorovements — Proiect No. 17-6883
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 Regional Vicinity................................................................................................................... 1-4
ExhibitSite Vicinity............................................................................................................................ 1-5
Exhibit 3 Existing Land Uses (1990 FEIS/EIR)....................................................................................1-7
Exhibit Proposed Lane Geometries..................................................................................................... 1-9
Exhibit 5 Bristol Street/Memory Lane Intersection Configuration (1990 FEIS/EIR) ......................... 1-11
Exhibit 6 Memorandum: Landscape Strip Exception.......................................................................... 1-13
LIST OF TABLES
Table Proposed Property Acquisition............................................................................................... 1-8
Final I December 2017 ii Table of Contents
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
§
Section
AAQS
ambient air quality standards
AB
Assembly Bill
AM
ante meridiem
APN
Assessor Parcel Number
AQMP
Air Quality Management Plant
C1
Community Commercial
Caltrans
California Department of Transportation
CAP
Climate Action Plan
CEQA
California Environmental Quality Act
CO
carbon monoxide
CO2
carbon dioxide
CPRC
California Public Resources Code
CWA
Clean Water Act
DOC
Department of Conservation
EIR
Environmental Impact Report
EIS
Environmental Impact Statement
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
etc.
etcetera
FEIS/EIR
Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report
FHWA
Federal Highway Administration
FTIP
Federal Transportation Improvement Program
GC
General Commercial
GHG
greenhouse gas
I
Interstate
LOS
Level of Service
LR -7
Low Density Residential
mph
miles per hour
NAAQS
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
No.
number
NPDES
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
03
ozone
OCTD
Orange County Transit District
PM
post meridiem
PM10
particulate matter less than less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter
Final I December 2017 111 Table of Contents
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
PMrs
particulate matter less than less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter
R1
Single -Family Residential
ROW
right-of-way
RTIP
Regional Transportation Improvement Program
RTP/SCS
Regional Transportafion Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
RWQCB
Regional Water Quality Control Board
SCAB
South Coast Air Basin
SCAG
Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD
South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCH
State Clearinghouse
SD27
Speck Development
SIPS
state implementation plans
SR
State Route
SWRCB
State Water Resources Control Board
TCE
Temporary Construction Easement
TCMs
Transportation Control Measures
TPD
tons per day
UBC
Uniform Building Code
U.S.
United States
UST
underground storage tank
Final I December 2017 iv Table of Contents
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Addendum has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as
amended, to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the proposed changes to the widening of Bristol Street,
from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane as proposed in the Project Final Environmental Impact Statement/
Environmental Impact Report No. 89-01 (FEIS/EIR) approved in 1990 (FHWA-CA-EIS-89-01-F; State
Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 87071509).
This Addendum focuses on the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane (the Project), situated in the northern
segment of the Bristol Street Widening Project This Addendum provides an assessment of potential environmental
impacts associated with minor design modifications and the issues of climate change and tribal cultural resources
which were not specifically addressed in the previously certified FEIS/IIR.
Design modifications to the Project, since approval of the 1990 FEIS/EIR, that are addressed in this Addendum
include the following:
The original approved 1990 FEIS/EIR proposed the same intersection lane configuration as that proposed.
As shown on Exhibit 5, the 1990 FEIS/EIR considered a 117 -foot ROW width in order to accommodate the
additional third through lane, specifically for the southbound travel lane However, no specific take of
adjoining properties was acknowledged although the existing ROW is only 100 feet Thus, the Project
changes clarify that in order to accommodate a third -through lane, the Project requires to widen the existing
street right-of-way (ROW) width of 100 feet to 111 feet, with the street section width from 84 feet to 95
feet, and the partial acquisition of three properties.
Although the proposed lane configuration was analyzed in the 1990 FE IR, necessary partial ROW
acquisition to accommodate this configuration was not considered. Proposed ROW acquisition would be
required on the west side of Bristol Street, north of the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane
Refer to Section 1.4.2, Proposed Property Acainsition, for a detailed description and mapping of these new
areas of acquisition. These Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) include 002-261-06, -29, and -30. Areas of
proposed ROW acquisition consists of vacant land, ornamental landscaping, and areas of paved driveway;
no modification/demolition of habitable structures would be required as part of these new partial
acquisitions to accommodate the Project The Project would also accommodate a bike lane and relocate the
existing perimeter fencing along Bristol Street and may include an extension of the existing storm water
pipeline system (located on the eastern side of Bristol Street) through a new lateral connection and new
catch basin at the Project site.
Additionally, the topics of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and tribal cultural resources were not specifically
identified in the previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR as these topics were not a subject matter that required
evaluation pursuant to CEQA at that time As such, this Addendum analyzes the effects of GHG emissions
associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project, as well as the Project's potential to affect tribal
cultural resources.
This Addendum to the previously certified 1990 FE IIR has been prepared because Project -related modifications
to the Bristol Street alignment do not trigger the need for further environmental analysis in a Subsequent or
Supplemental FIR under the requirements CEQA (refer to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163,
respectively).
1.1 PURPOSE OF AN ADDENDUM
Under CEQA, when an FIR has been certified for a project, no Subsequent EIR may be required for that project
unless the lead agency deternines, based upon substantial evidence, that one or more specked circumstances has
occured. Only if one or more of the following circumstances arises is a Subsequent EIR required, pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162:
Final I December 2017 1-1 Introduction
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
1. Substantial charges are proposed in the project which will require major revision of the previous EIR
due to the involvement ofrewsignifical environmental effects or asubstontial increase in the severity
ofpreviously identifiedsigniticant effects;
2. Substantial charges occur with respect to the circumstances uruler which the project is unrkrtaken
which will require major revision of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new sigruficmrt
environmental increase in the severity ofpreviously identified significant effects, or
3. New information ofsubstantial importance, which was not knamn and could at have been known with
the exercise of reasonable diligence of the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any
of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more signal effects not discussed in the previous SIR;
(B) Signifeaht effects previously exatu ed will be substantially more severe than shown in the
previous EIR,
(C) Afifigabon measures or alternatives previously fourd not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible, and would substantially reduce ore or more significant effects ofthe project, but the
project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alterative; or
(D) Magadan measures or alternatives which are consirkrably different from those analyzed in
the previous EIR would substantially reduce ors or more sighificat effects on the environ-
ment, but the project proponents akctine to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
(CEQA Guiktires Section 15162[x])
A Supplement to an FIR (or Supplemental EIR), which is naurower in scope than a Subsequent EIR, may be
prepared if any of the above criteria apply, but `only minor changes or additions would be necessary to make the
previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15163[a][2]). In
the absence of the need to prepare either a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR, an Addendum may be prepared. More
specifically, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 states:
(a) The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if
some changes or additions are necessary but none ofte conditions described in Section 15162 calling
for preparation ofa subsequent EIR have occurred
(b) An addendum to an adopted negative akclaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or
aldttions are necessary or none of the conditions alescribed in Section 15162 catling for the
preparation ofa subsequent EIR or negative a i claration have occurred.
(c) An addendum reed at be circulated for public review but can be inclnakd in or attached to the final
EIR or adopted negative a i claration.
(d) The dectsion-making body shall consider the adaknaLm with the final EIR or adopted negative
akclaration prior to making a akcision on the project
(e) A briefexplaralion of the a i cision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should
be incluakd in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency'sfindings on the project, or elsewhere in the
record. The explanation must be supported by substantial eviaknce.
This Addendum to the previously certified FEIS/EIR for the approved Bristol Street Widening Project has been
prepared because the evaluation of the proposed modifications does notresult in any of the circumstances requiring
a Subsequent or Supplemental EIS/EIR. Although the proposed modifications would result in development that
differs from that in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, those modifications do not trigger the need for preparation of a Subsequent
or Supplemental EIR under the criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163, respectively. Section
22_0 Environmental Checklist and Section 3.0, Environmental Consequences, of this Addendum demonstrate that no
substantial changes would result from the proposed Project modifications nor have the existing conditions in the
Final I December 2017 1-2 Introduction
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Project vicinity substantially changes such that major revisions to the previously certified 1990 FEIS/IIR would be
required. The Project would not result in a new significant environmental effect or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified significant effects. Specifically, the proposed modifications, as compared to the
1990 FEIS/EIR, do not result in new or substantially greater significant impacts because the scale and nature of the
proposed modifications are sufficiently similar to that analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR such that the impacts of the
proposed modifications are within the levels and types of environmental impacts disclosed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR-
In addition, no substantial changes in circumstances under Section 15162(a)(2) have occurred since the certification
of the 1990 FEIS/EIR for the approved Bristol Street Widening Project that would result in new significant impacts
or substantially increase the severity of significant impacts previously identified, since the background
environmental conditions have not significantly changed since that time The City of Santa Ana has received no
information indicating there has been a substantial change in any circumstances that would result in a new or
substantially greater significant impact
Furthermore, no new information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time of the 1990
FE IIR preparation, has been revealed that shows new or substantially greater significant impacts would result
(see CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][3]). In addition, there are no new or different mitigation measures or
altematives that would substantially reduce one or more significant impacts of the approved Bristol Street Widening
Project but that are not adopted. The proposed modifications do not identify or require adoption of any further
mitigation measures or altematives beyond those provided in the certified 1990 FE IIR for the approved Bristol
Street Widening Project, since additional mitigation measures are either not necessary or not feasible, and the
altematives analyzed in the 1990 FE IR represent a reasonable range as required pursuant to CEQA (see CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162[a][3]).
This Addendum relies on the certified 1990 FEIS/EIR and the related administrative record, in addition to the
additional documentation included to support the Addendum. The Addendum is to be included or attached to the
1990 FEIS/FIR and is not to be considered as an independent or separate document
As this Addendum does not identify new or substantially greater significant impacts, circulation for public review
and comment is not necessary pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(c). However, the City will provide a
30 -day public notice for Public Hearing at which time the City Council will consider and adopt or reject this
Addendum (refer to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164[d]). The findings of the City Council in its resolution of
adoption of this Addendum, if adopted, will reflect this Addendum, which provides the basis and substantial
evidence for the decision not to prepare a Subsequent or Supplemental FIR (refer to CEQA Guidelines Section
15164[e]).
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed Project includes the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane in the City of Santa Ana (City).
The City, located within the County of Orange, is surounded by the cities of Tustin, Orange, Costa Mesa, Fountain
Valley, and Garden Grove The Project site is located approximately 0.73 mile west of Interstate 5 (I-5) and
approximately 0.25 mile south of State Route 22 (SR -22); refer to Exhibit 1 Regional Vicinity. and Exhibit 2tete
Ficin .
The Project area and surrounding vicinity are located within an urbanized area of the City. Existing land uses near
the Project site consist of multi- and single-family residential uses, commercial uses, and vacant land. These
surrounding land uses are further described as follows:
North: Bristol Street continues north of the Project site Commercial uses (a small strip -mall with
neighborhood serving retail uses are located to the northwest and Floral Park Promenade is located to the
northeast). These properties are designated by the General Plan as Low Density Residential (LR -7) and
General Commercial (GC), respectively, and both properties are zoned by the Municipal Code as
Community Commercial (Cl).
Final I December 2017 1-3 Introduction
LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
La Brea
Habra
IMPERIAL HM Yorba
Seal
Beach
Huntington
Beach
Project Site
S A N B E R N A R D I N O
COUNTY
A
�F
o�
Fq
N
0 not to scale
INTERNATIONAL 1 07/2/17 JN161391 MAS
San LL
Clemente
J
S A N D I E G O
COUNTY
Project Site
BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Regional Vicinity
Exhibit 1
Anaheim 111)
HIIIS
\
Anaheim
o
RIVERSIDE
Villa
Park
�¢s
��
COUNTY
KATELLA AVE
Orange
2
`\
ceaarmw AVE
Garden°-
-Grove ® °
Tustin e` °
sgro ngao
O R A N G E
C O U N T Y
`%
m Santa
Ana
oy
I
EoimoEa AVE
qGN
g
1
Irvine s,t,
a
Costa
m °°
Lake
`
Mesa
Forest
/
D
95ry. QOIry NG,
�O
�RRlpo6
�+
Newport
d)A
Mission
%A
Beach
Viejo
19
Laguna
Niguel
A
�F
o�
Fq
N
0 not to scale
INTERNATIONAL 1 07/2/17 JN161391 MAS
San LL
Clemente
J
S A N D I E G O
COUNTY
Project Site
BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Regional Vicinity
Exhibit 1
iL Aa
-- - - ORANGE ROAD
CORRIGAN 'AVENUE
41
�� e "I i 1 • �r .• ll ,a)
-
Lu
•�
A,
Q ti W♦ F`
,�_
.,_4
rI � ;4m, �� IF
t-
EE
4
- oje _
r c
1 P t
�� Site Ifi •. �'_
I Alk, .1
T..� ,� mai+.. i _ � JI bh +..A'��'�1'1 `..ay� -,�• E R.. � -
t E O RY L
M M ANE
*I
MARCELLA LANE, s i r s
a -
v P"
e° i r; W PARK LANE — .- b►
r � i1 P
]� E[E[ Ilk
■
ilul •. �. • - 1 � !/ 44
At_
m �'� •i
417- IL
Michael Baker
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
• East. Memory Lane continues east of the Project site Commercial uses (Floral Park Promenade located to
the east and northeast and a Shell gasoline service station located to the east and southeast) are present
These properties are all designated GC and zoned Cl. Further southeast of Shell, single-family residential
uses (designated LR -7 and zoned Single -Family Residence [R1]) arepresent
• South: Bristol Street continues south of the Project site Commercial uses (die Shell gasoline service
station located to the south and southeast and a strip -mall with neighborhood serving retail uses located to
the south and southwest) are present All of these properties are designated GC and zoned Cl. Further
southeast of Shell, Casa de Santiago single-family residential uses (designated LR -7 and zoned RD are
present
• West Memory Lane continues west of the Project site Vacant land (designated GC and zoned Cl) is
situated to the west of the Project site and further west is the Portofino Apartments (designated LR -7 and
zoned Specific Development [SD27]). Islander Apaurnents (designated LR -7 and zoned CD are situated to
the west and northwest of the Project site
As shown on Exhibit 3, Exi tine Land Uses (1990 FEISIEIR), these land uses have not substantially changed since
preparation of the 1990 FEIS/EIR. It is acknowledged that the 1990 FEIS/EIR did not include land uses north of
Memory Lane in the applicable figures. In order to provide information on land uses north of Memory Lane,
Exhibit 3 also identifies these curent land uses. These curent land uses have not substantially changed since the
1990 FEIS/IIR, as the 1990 FEIS/EIR considered the surounding land uses to include a mix of commercial and
residential development
1.3 PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.3.1 APPROVED 1990 FINAL EIR/EIS
The City of Santa Ana General Plan designates Bristol Street as a Major Arterial Highway traveling in a north -south
direction. As a result of significant growth and traffic congestion on Bristol Street, the City of Santa Ana, in the late
1980s, proposed to widen Bristol Street from a four -lane roadway to a six -lane arterial in accordance with adopted
County of Orange and City of Santa Ana standards for a Major Arterial Highway. A joint EIS/EIR was prepared
and approved by the City of Santa Ana and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the widening
of Bristol Street in 1990. The 1990 Bristol Street Widening Project entailed a 3.9 -mile segment of Bristol Street
from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane The Project site is situated within the northem-most portion of Bristol
Street, previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR as the segment from Seventeenth Street to Memory Lane
However, due to significant costs associated with construction and availability of funding the Bristol Street
Widening Project was divided into multiple segments and phases, compared to that analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR:
• Phase 1, from McFadden Avenue to Pine Street;
• Phase II, from 3`tl Street to Civic Center;
• Phase IIIA, from Civic Center to Washington Avenue;
• Phase 11113, from Washington Avenue to 17a' Street; and
• Phase IV, from Warner Avenue to St Andrew Place
The Bristol Street Widening segments operate independently; operation of one segment is not dependent on another.
It is acknowledged that prior to dividing the Bristol Street Widening Project for funding purposes, construction of
some sections was completed and was not included in the phasing described above, including the following:
• St Andrew Place to McFadden Avenue;
• Elm Street to Memory Lane; and
• Pine Street to 3`6 Street
The segment between 17a' Street and Elm Street is not funded; therefore, no phasing has been identified.
Final I December 2017 1-6 Introduction
zw
//1�J��l1L1
s L
GNEEN6NIEN SfNEEi CINOF S4Ni ANA JZ NiIESAGd:: :y I v;
BRISTOL STREET
10 H.
" IH
�
F�
LEGEND
Note: Shows current land use as of2017.
z
BRISTOL STREETgig i8jilo
�
0
SHIRR
BRISTOL STREET
0 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
?!??!??!?! MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
ti=ti=fi COMMERCIAL
FM GAS STATION
Source: Willdan Associates
INTERNATIONAL
® I
0 not to scale
11/1317 JN 161391 MAS
BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Existing Land Use (1990 FEIS/EIR)
Exhibit 3
'ImfI�J
GREENBRIER STREET
L�Uzi
l
BRISTOL STREET
0 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
?!??!??!?! MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
ti=ti=fi COMMERCIAL
FM GAS STATION
Source: Willdan Associates
INTERNATIONAL
® I
0 not to scale
11/1317 JN 161391 MAS
BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Existing Land Use (1990 FEIS/EIR)
Exhibit 3
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
The 1990 FEIS/EIR (SCH No. 87071509) was approved on November 19, 1990. The 1990 FEIS/EIR and
associated technical studies, incorporated herein by reference, documented the environmental impacts of widening
Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane in the City of Santa Ana. As stated in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, the
purpose and goals of the Bristol Street Widening Project were to:
1. Provide sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate current and future traffic demand.
2. Improve the performance and safety of the roadway for the benefit of the motoring public.
3. To reduce current and projected future delays experienced at major intersections and to design
intersections to function at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS).
4. To design the roadway in manner conducive to the provision of public transportation, namely bus
service provided by the Orange County Transit District (OCTD).
1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1.4.1 PROPOSED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
The City proposes the widening of Bristol Street, just north of Memory Lane, to accommodate a third southbound
through lane at the intersection; refer to Exhibit 4, Proposed Zorn Geometrics. This additional through lane would
result in the relocation of the existing dedicated right -tum lane slightly west The proposed widening would involve
the partial acquisition of three parcels in order to accommodate the new total ROW widths (proposed to expand
from 100 feet to 111 feet). The proposed intersection improvements would require relocation of curb/gutter,
sidewalk, driveway approaches, and both public and private utilities (including the existing traffic signal). Existing
perimeter fencing along Bristol Street would also be relocated and replaced in-kind with a similar aesthetic
Treatment. Due to the existing building setback requirements, the Project would require approval from the City
Manager for landscape strip Exceptions for building setbacks per Municipal Code Section 41-781.
The Project proposes a 12 -month construction period (anticipated to be completed by December 2019). At least one
lane in each direction of travel would remain open and existing driveway access along Bristol Street and Memory
Lane would be retained at all times. The maximum excavation depth would be two feet for roadway excavation, and
approximately 10 feet or less for utility footings/excavation. Approximately 30 cubic yards of cut material is
anticipated to be exported. Other improvements may include a new stormwater catch basin and a new lateral
connection to the existing stormwater pipeline in Bristol Street
1.4.2 PROPOSED PROPERTY ACQUISITION
As listed in Table 1 Proposed Property Acquisition, a total of three Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs) (002-261-
06, -29, and -30) would be partially acquired as a result of the proposed intersection improvements; refer to Exhibit
4. All proposed areas of acquisition include vacant portions of commercial and multi -family residential properties.
Thesevacant areas consist of bare soils, paving/asphalt, or omamental landscaping. The acquisitions would comply
with policies pursuant to the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 as
implemented by the City of Santa Ana.
Table 1
Proposed Property Acquisition
Final I December 2017 1-8 Introduction
Permanent
Temporary
APN
Address Existing Land Use
Acquisition Type
Acquisition
Construction
(squarefeet)
Easement
(square feet)
OD2261 06
2702 N. Bristol Street
Vacant Commercial
Pallial and TOE
1,586
723
OD2261-29
1313 W. Memory Lane
Ornamental Landscaping and Driveway
Pallial and TOE
1,265
575
Associated with the PoilofinoA ailments
00226130
2724 N. Bristol Street
Ornamental Landscaping and Driveway
Pallial and TOE
334
457
Associated with thelslanderreailments
Notes: TCE- TemporaryConstrmtion Easement
Final I December 2017 1-8 Introduction
Z APN: 002-261-06
J 2702 N. BRISTOL ST
LEGEND
Impacted Properties
0 Proposed Temporary Construction Easement
0 Proposed Sidewalk
0 Proposed Street Pavement
Source: Santa Ana Public Works Agency
INTERNATIONAL
11/16/17 JN 161391 MAS
in I
�PROP. R/W
m
APN: 002-261-29
1313 W. MEMORY LN.
o QIBIKE LANE
C>
— — — —
O—
o L 150' POCKET
N
,-31111111 4. -J*
m
NOT TO SCALE
APN: 002-261-30
2724 N. BRISTOL ST.
EX. R/W
N
RAISED MEDIAN
------------
N
O v
BRISTOL ST IS
a . MA
BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Proposed Lane Geometrics
Exhibit 4
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
1.4.3 CHANGES AS COMPARED TO THE APPROVED PROJECT
It should be noted that Project phasing has been revised from the original phases identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
As discussed in Section 1.3.1 Approved 1990 Final FIR/FIS. construction phasing of the entire Bristol Street
Widening Project has been further subdivided as follows:
• SL Andrew Place to McFadden Avenue(Constructed in 2002);
• Elm Street to Memory Lane (Constructed in 2003);
• Pine Street to 3`a Street (Constructed in 2009);
• Phase I: McFadden Avenue to Pine Street (Constructed in 20111);
• Phase II: 3`6 Street to Civic Center Drive (Constructed in 2014);
• PhaseIIIA: Civic Center Drive to Washington Avenue;
• Phase 11113: Washington Avenue to 17a Street hinder construction);
• Phase IV Warner Avenue to St Andrew Place; and
• Phase V: 17v' Street to Elm Street
The proposed intersection improvements (proposed Project addressed herein) differs from the original configuration
of the 1990 FEIS/IIR, as follows:
• As shown on Exhibit 4 and Exhibit 5 Bristol S/reetl1kmory Lane Intersection Confleurrdion (1990
FEISIEIR), the original approved 1990 FEIS/EIR proposed the same intersection lane configuration as that
proposed. As shown on Exhibit 5, the 1990 FEIS/EIR considered a 117 -foot ROW width in order to
accommodate the additional third through lane, specifically for the southbound travel lane However, no
specific take of adjoining properties was acknowledged although the existing ROW is only 100 feet Thus,
the Project changes clarify that in order to accommodate a third -through lane, the Project requires to widen
the existing street ROW width of 100 feet to 111 feet, with the street section width from 84 feet to 95 feet,
and the partial acquisition of three properties.
Although the proposed lane configuration was analyzed in the 1990 FE IR, necessary partial ROW
acquisition to accommodate this configuration was not considered. Proposed ROW acquisition would be
required on the west side of Bristol Street, north of the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane. As
depicted on Exhibit 5 Nese Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) include 002-261-06, -29, and -30. Areas of
proposed ROW acquisition consist of vacant land, omamental landscaping and areas of paved driveway;
no modification/demolition of habitable structures would be required as part of these new partial
acquisitions to accommodate the Project The Project would also accommodate a bike lane and relocate the
existing perimeter fencing along Bristol Street and may include an extension of the existing stomp water
pipeline system (located on the eastem side of Bristol Street) through a new lateral connection and new
catch basin at the Project site
An assessment of construction and Project -related GHG emissions and potential impacts to tribal cultural resources
was also not addressed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, and as a result is addressed in this Addendum.
1.4.4 CONSTRUCTION TIMEFRAME
Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would occur following acquisition of the required
parcels. The Project proposes a 12 -month construction period (anticipated to be completed by December 2019).
However, it is acknowledged that the Project could be constructed in multiple phases, depending on funding.
1 Phase numbers were assigned to the Bristol Street Widening Project subsequent to cancelation of the CenterLine
Light Rail Transit Project and associated reallocation of funding from that canceled project to the Bristol Street Widening
Project.
Final I December 2017 1-10 Introduction
Iii
I Ivi
i L.,.
" 13 1T 1i 1T 10 9' 12 ti 13
r � �
J
Q m SZ '�
i � Y
T T
13' i1 1T 10' 10' 1T 1}T 1}3'
94'
rO'
I
Bristol Street
Source: Willdan Associates
0 not to scale
I NTE R N A T 10 NAL I 10/17/17 JN 161391 HAS
BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Bristol Street/Memory Lane
Intersection Configuration
(1990 FEIS/EIR)
Exhibit 5
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Imorovements — Proiect No. 17-6883
1.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
Landscape strip Exceptions for building setbacks must be approved by the City Manager per Municipal Code
Section 41-781, and this Addendum must be adopted by the City of Santa Ana City Council as to its adequacy in
complying with the requirements of CEQA and the previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR. The City Council will
consider the information contained in the Addendum and the 1990 FEIS/EIR in making a decision to approve or
deny the proposed Project.
1.6 CLARIFICATIONS TO THE ADDENDUM UPON
CERTIFICATION
As documented throughout Section 3.0, Environmental Consequences, the project does not involve substantial
changes, such that major revisions to the previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR are required. Substantial changes
with respect to circumstances have not resulted. No new information of substantial importance has occurred. The
project would not result in new or more significant impacts than what was previously considered. Previously
identified significant impacts would not be substantially increased as a result of the project. No new mitigation
measures would be required. Thus, the City of Santa Ana, as the Lead Agency, has determined that Project -related
modifications to the Bristol Street alignment do not trigger the need for further environmental analysis in a
Subsequent or Supplemental EIR under the requirements CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163,
respectively).
As this Addendum does not identify new or substantially greater significant impacts, a 30 -day circulation for public
review and comment is not necessary pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(c) and was not conducted.
However, it is acknowledged that the City provided a 10 -day public notice for Public Hearing, at which time the
City Council considered the Addendum for certification. One public comment letter regarding the project was
submitted at the Public Hearing (conducted on December 5, 2017) by Mr. Mark Rosen. The comment letter did not
specifically include any comments pertaining to the content or adequacy of the Addendum. The Addendum was
certified on December 5, 2017 (pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164[d]). The findings of the City Council
in its resolution of adoption of this Addendum reflect this Addendum, which provides the basis and substantial
evidence for the decision not to prepare a Subsequent or Supplemental FIR (refer to CEQA Guidelines Section
15164[e]), and, thus, no further action is required.
On December 5, 2017, City Council authorized City Manager to approve an exception to the landscape strip setback
per Municipal Code Section 41-781. The approved landscape exception is shown in Exhibit 6 Memorandum.
Final I December 2017 1-12 Introduction
MEMORANDUM
Raul Godinez II, City Manager
To: City Manager Office Date:
Fred Mousavipour, Executive Directo
From: Public Works Agency �kA -
Subject:
December 5, 2017
PROJECT NO. 17-6883
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Widening—Requirement of Landscape Strip
Project background:
Bristol Street is classified as a north -south Major Arterial per the City's General Plan Circulation
Element (GPCE) and the County of Orange's Master Plan of Arterial Highway (MPAH). Currently, the
segments to the south and north of the Bristol Street/Memory Lane intersection have 3 lanes in each
direction except for the southbound lanes just north of Memory Lane where is has only 2 southbound
lanes.
The Bristol Street/Memory Lane intersection project is proposed to accommodate a third southbound
through lane just north of Memory Lane (Exhibit A). This additional through lane would result in the
relocation of the existing dedicated right -turn lane slightly west. The proposed widening would involve
the partial acquisition of three parcels in order to accommodate the new total ROW widths from 100
feet to 111 feet. As a result of the widening, the back of new sidewalk is measured approximately 11
feet from the patio fence at 1313 W. Memory Lane and 12 feet to 14 feet from the entrance structure at
2724 N. Bristol Street (Exhibit B & Q.
According to Municipal Code Section 41-781, Requirement of landscape strip as part of street
widening, the following applies:
(a) Whenever city acquires a portion of parcel along street frontage for a street widening or other
public works project, the city shall also acquire an interest in the real property sufficient to allow a
landscape -only strip behind the sidewalk that is of a width that conforms to the then current city
standard for the parcel.
(b) The city manager may authorize exceptions to this section on a case-by-case basis, in consultation
with the city council.
The current city standard requires a landscape setback of 15 feet. To avoid full acquisitions of 1313 W.
Memory Lane and 2724 N. Bristol Street, staff is requesting the City Manager authorize this exception
to landscape setback requirement
Enclosure: Exhibit A Approved:
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
L �' 1
Raul Godinez Date:
City Manager
er,A uwgi,tw15x1 den 17.4.1x-- Exhibit6
4
zo
0
z co
3 LL.
M>- r m
Li -
0
I I 1 .9 .01 01 '01 •8 '01 '01 01 ,Zi 8
kk
11
N-1 AHON
'o .11 .01 :01 "Ol q I,ol 101 101 21 IR
W
Z 2WW
z
<0
WW
0
65
Er
m
I
A
��q91
- r
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
2.1 BACKGROUND
1.
Project Title: Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements Project (Project No. 17-6883)
2.
Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, M-36
Santa Ana, CA 92702
3.
Contact Person and Phone Num ber:
Kenny Nguyen, P.E.
Senior Ciml Engineer
714.647.5632
4.
Project Location: The intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane in the City of Santa Ana. The Project site is
located approximately 0.73 mile west of Interstate 5 (1-5) and approximately 0.25 mile south of State Route 22 (SR -
22).
5.
Project Sponsor's Nam a and Address:
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, M-36
Santa Ana, CA 92702
6.
General Plan Designation: General Commercial (GC) and Low Density Residential (LR -7)
7.
Zoning: Community Commercial (Cl) and Specific Development(SD27)
8. Description of the Project: The City proposes the widening of Bristol Street just north of Memory Lane, to
accommodate a third southbound through lane at the intersection. This additional through lane would result in the
relocation of the existing dedicated right -turn lane slightly west The proposed Widening would involve the partial
acquisition of three parcels in order to accommodate the new total ROW widths (proposed to expand from 100 feet
to 111 feet). The proposed intersection improvements would require relocation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, driveway
approaches, and both public and private utilities (including the existing traffic signal). Due to the existing building
setback requirements, the Project would require approval from the City Manager for landscape strip Exceptions for
building setbacks per Municipal Code Section 41-781. The original approved 1990 FEIS/EIR proposed the same
intersection lanes Width and configuration as that proposed. The 1990 FEIS/EIR considered a 117 -foot ROW Width
in order to accommodate the additional third through lane, specifically for the southbound travel lane. However, no
specific take of adjoining properties was acknowledged although the existing ROW is only 100 feet. Thus, the
Project changes clarify that in order to accommodate a third -through lane and bike lane, the Project requires to
widen the existing street ROW width of 100 feet to 111 feet, with the street section Width from 84 feet to 95 feet, and
the partial acquisition of three properties.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Surrounding land uses consist of commercial and multi- and single-family
residential uses; referto Section 1.2, Protect Location.
10.
agreement).
City of Santa Ana
Final I December 2017 2-1 Environmental Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
This page intentionally left blank.
Final I December 2017 2-2 Environmental Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
This section describes the effects of the proposed Project as compared to those identified in the previously approved
1990 FEIS/EIR document, and to existing conditions and any changes in regulatory setting since the previously
approved 1990 FEIS/EIR. Furthermore, this section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with
the proposed Project The issue areas evaluated in this document include the following pursuant to Appendix G of
the CEQA Guidelines, and have been modified to evaluate the proposed Project changes for which an FEIS/EIR has
been previously approved (in 1990) to assist in the determination of the need for a supplemental EIS/EIR or an
Addendum.
The modified Initial Study checklist, comparing the effects of the Project modifications as compared to those
analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, is found in Appendix A, Modifiedlnifial &udv Checklist
• Aesthetics
• Agricultural and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology/Water Quality
• Land Use
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Transportation/fraffrc
• Tribal Cultural Resources
• Utilities/Service Systems
• Mandatory Findings of Significance
A summary of impacts of the previously approved Bristol Street Widening Project and the mitigation measures
imposed is provided along with an analysis of the potential impacts resulting from the proposed Project and whether
those impacts substantially exceeds those discussed in the previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR.
3.1 AESTHETICS
This section coresponds with the following 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Emironmental Consequences and
Mfigation Measures, subsections:
• Subsection A, Landform Aloddiication;
• Subsection G, Urban Landscaping;
• Subsection J, Light and Glare; and
• Subsection K, Aesthetic Considerations.
Would the project:
a) Have ¢substantial adverse effect on ¢scenic vista?
The proposed Project would not result in any significant modifications or changes from the previously approved
1990 FEIS/EIR. The Project is located within a highly developed urban area of the City of Santa Ana. Existing land
use near the Project site consists of multi- and single-family residential uses, commercial uses, and vacant land. No
scenic vistas are located within the Project area. No impact to scenic vistas would result from the proposed Project
Certified 1990 FRIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
Final I December 2017 3-1 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but nat limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
hdstorlc buildings radius a state scenic highway?
State Route 91 is located approximately 10 miles north-east of the Project site The Project would not be visible
from SR -91. No impacts would occur in this regard.
Certified 1990 FRIS/RIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quaiity ofthe she audits surroundings?
The proposed Project is located in a highly -urbanized area of the City of Santa Ana. The Project would widen the
existing roadway ROW from 100 feet to 111 feet, resulting in additional property take for the purposes of roadway
use These changes in character would be similar to those analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Per the 1990 FEIS/EIR
Mitigation Measures G-1 and G-2, the Project would be compatible with the Bristol Street Widening Project
landscaping theme and a Xeriscape (climate appropriate landscaping) program would be considered. Existing
perimeter fencing along Bristol Street would be relocated and replaced in-kind with a similar aesthetic treatment
These changes in character/quality would be nominal, compared to that previously considered. As such, the
proposed Project would not result in substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FRIS/RIR Mitigation Measures:
G-1 A consistent theme will be developed and implemented for the landscaping within the public right-of-
way for Bristol Street as a part of the street widening project
G-2 Consideration will be given to the implementation of a Xeriscape landscaping program. Such a
program would involve the use of low -maintenance, drought -tolerant plantmaterials, thereby reducing
long -tern costs for maintenance and water consumption.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Light and glare are curentiy generated from various sources within the Project area (e.g., commercial and retail
businesses, signage, street lighting and parking lot lighting). The proposed Project does not involve the
construction of any habitable structures. Relocation of the street lighting fixtures would occur. Therefore, no new
sources of light orglare would resultwith implementation of the proposed Project The proposed Project would not
generate additional daytime or nighttime illumination beyond that curentiy experienced within the area. The
relocation of the traffic signal pole would be required to meet the Citywide Design Guidelines and the 1990
FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure J-1 pertaining to cut-off shielding techniques. With compliance with the 1990
FEIS/EIR mitigation, the proposed Project would notresult in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990
FIIS/IIR.
Certified 1990 FRIS/RIR Mitigation Measures:
J-1 Consideration will be given to the selection of new street fixtures which have cut-off shields to
minimize light and glare nuisances for residential properties adjoining Bristol Street
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
i California Department of Transportation, California Scenic Highway Mapping S},,tem, http://www.dot.ca.gov/
hq/LandAwh/16 livability/scenic highways/index.htm, accessed August 30, 2017.
Final I December 2017 3-2 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
3.2 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
The previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR did not include evaluation for agricultural resources, as no agricultural
resources are located within the area of analysis.
In determindng nhether impacts to agricultural resources are sigurwant environmental effects, Lead agencies
may refer to the CatiforniaAgricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Dept of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessrg impacts on agriculture andfarmland
In determining whether impacts to fares resources, including timberland are significant environmental effects,
Lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
regarding the state's inventory afforest land inchuding the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest
Legacy Assessment Project,' andfores carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adapted
by the California Air Resouvees Board Wouldtheproject:
a) Convert Prime Farmland Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
CatiforndaResouveesAgemy, to non-agricultural use?
The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program classifies the Project site as Urban and Built-up land. No Prime,
Unique, or Farmland of Statewide Importance is located in the vicinity of the Project site No impacts would result
from the proposed Project The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the
1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
A) Conflict walk exromg, zoaingfor agizeultaal use, or a Wu7liamsonAct contract?
The Project site is located within a highly -urbanized area in the City of Santa Ana. Lands within the Project area are
designated General Commercial and Low Density Residential as identified in the City of Santa Ana's General Plan.
The zoning designation of properties within the Project area are Community Commercial and Specific Development
(SD27). No agricultural uses exist on site or in the vicinity, and the Project would not conflict with a Williamson
Act contract as none exist in the Project area. The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning, of fares land (as defined in Public Resonances
Cade section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Cade section 4526), or
6mberlmudzonea7YmberlaudProductum (as defineaby Government Cade section 51104(g))?
The Project site is located within a highly -urbanized area in the City of Santa Ana. The zoning designation of
properties within the Project area are Community Commercial and Specific Development (SD27). No forest land or
timberland production exist on site or in the vicinity, and the Project would not conflict zoning pertaining to these
resources. The proposed Projectwould not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3 Califomia Department ofConservation, Orange County Important Farmland 2014,ftp://ftp.conerv.ca.gov/p.b/dlhp/
1rvMP/pd1/2014/ora14.pdf, accessed August 17, 2017.
Final I December 2017 3-3 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
14 Result in the loss offorea land or conversion afforest 1aulto non -forest use?
Refer to Response 3.2(c). Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which. due to their location or nature, could
result in conversion of Farmland to non-Wriculhnnl use or conversion afforest land to non -forest
use?
Refer to Responses 3.2 (a) through 3.2(c). Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater
impacts than previously analyzed, in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3.3 AIR QUALITY
This section coresponds with 1990 FEIS/EIR Section IV, Enmironmental Consequences and Abligation Aleasures,
Subsection AAir Quality, and Subsection V, Construction Impacts ofthe previously approved.
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air qualdy management or air pollution
control district maybe relied upon to make the following determinatom. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implements ion ofthe applicable air quality plan?
The proposed Project is consistent with the applicable plans, ordinances and policies establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system as described in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. According to the
1990 FEIS/EIR, the widening of Bristol Street was designated in the Orange County Master Plan, and was
recommended in the Bristol Street Corridor Study —Final Report, prepared by Motile, Grover & Associates, dated
1983° Itwas also recommended in the Arterial Highway Element —SamaAmElement—SandAna Transportation
Corridor State H Alternative Analysis, prepared by Parsons, Brinekedhoff, Quade and Douglas, Inc., dated 1983.
The proposed widening is also consisterht with the recommendation found in the Intercity Liaison Commitee —Five -
Year Ramportation Study Update to 1990, prepared by Basmaciyan-Damell, Inc., dated 19855 Furthermore, the
proposed Project would improve traffic operations through the Project coridor. Impacts would be similar to those
identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
The Bristol Street Widening Project is included in SCAG's 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS): A Plan for Mobility, Accessibility, Sustainability and a High Quality of Life
(2016 RTP) (RTP ID ORA125).° The Project is also currently listed in SCAG's financially constrained 2017
Federal Tramportaton Improvement Program (2017 FLIP) for fiscal year 2016/2017 — 2021/2022. The Project
entry in the 2017 FTIP identifies the following scope of work: BRISTOL ST (MEMORY LANE TO 17111
STREET AND 3RD STREET TO ST. ANDREWS PLACE) WIDEN FROM 4 TO 6 LANES; split project
ORA150003, ORA150004, ORA150005, ORA150006.7
4 POWER Engineers, Bristol greet Widening Phase 11D1—Civic Center Drive to Washington Avenue Environmental
Impact Report Addendum, January 20, 2015.
s Ibid
6 Southam Califontia Association of Governments, 20162040 Regional Transportation Plan/An.rtainable
Commu ities 9rategy (RTP/SCS), TranrpoKation STysfem Project List, 2016.
Southan California Association of G vemments, Final 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program, 2016.
Final I December 2017 3-4 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
The Project's design concept and scope have not changed significantly from what was analyzed in the RTIP and
FTIP. This analysis found that the plan and, therefore the individual projects contained in the plan, are conforming
projects and would have air quality impacts consistent with those identified in the SIPS for achieving the NAAQS.
The FHWA determined the RTIP to conform to the SIP.
The proposed widening of Bristol Street, from Memory Lane to 17r Street has been included in the FTIP since
1992. The FTIP gives priority to eligible Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) identified in the SIP and
provides sufficient funds to provide for their implementation. The FHWA determined the FTIP to conform to the
SIP on December 16, 2016. No significant impacts would occur. Implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Furthermore, the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is designated by the state and US Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) as nonattainment for ozone (03), and particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less (PMzs) and
attainment/maintenance for carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less PM1o. The
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) developed regional emissions thresholds to determine
whether or not a project would contribute to air pollutant violations. If a project exceeds the regional air pollutant
thresholds, then the project would substantially contribute to air quality violations in the SCAB. In addition, a
project would also contribute to air pollutant violations if localized emissions result in an exceedance of the ambient
air quality standards (AAQS).
The proposed Project would be consistent with the Major Arterial designation of the City of Santa Ana General Plan
Circulation Element and the County of Orange's Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Additionally, the Project would
improve traffic flow, maintain vehicle capacity, reduce idling and result in a reduction in air pollutant emissions as
was previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Thus, no new or substantial increase of impacts have been
identified and no new mitigation measures are required.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/FIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional new mitigation measures are required.
b) violate my air quality standard or contribute substmrtiaIIy to an existing or projected air quaffiy
violation?
All proposed areas of acquisition include vacant portions of commercial and multi -family residential properties.
These vacant areas consist of dirt, paving/asphalt or omamental landscaping. The Project proposes to change the
existing street section from a total ROW width of 100 feet to 111 feet, which is a nominal increase over what was
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. No structure modification/demolition would be required as part of these
new partial acquisitions to accommodate the Project As determined in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, short -tern construction
emissions from the Project would be below the SCAQMD's significance thresholds for all criteria pollutants,
including PM10 and PMis, even in the absence of specific dust reduction measures. Construction phasing for the
proposed Projectwould be similar to the construction activities and phasing described in the 1990 FEIS/EIR for the
Project Therefore, the construction emissions would be similar to those in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. It has been
determined that construction emissions would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation. Thus, impacts are considered less than significant
Because emissions were found to be below the SCAQMD's significance thresholds, Project related construction
emissions are not considered by the SCAQMD to result in a significant air quality impact In addition, mitigation
measures included in the 1990 FEIS/EIR would further reduce construction -related air quality impacts.
The proposed Project would improve traffic flow and reduce idling, as the Projectwould add one additional through
lane and this configuration was analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. The modifications to the 1990 FEIS/EIR would add
more ROW to the existing right -tum lane and serve to increase traffic flow through the intersection, but would not
increase the overall road capacity, previously considered lane configuration, or air quality impacts disclosed in the
1990 FEIS/EIR The proposed Project would result in the same operational air emissions as that considered in the
1990 FEIS/EIR, which were below SCAQMD thresholds. Thus, no new or substantial increase of impacts have
been identified and no new mitigation measures are required.
Final I December 2017 3-5 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Certlfled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures
H-1 SCAQMD Rule 403 will be adhered to, insuring the clean-up of construction -related dirt on approach
routes to the site.
H-2 Adequate watering techniques will be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction -
generated dust particulates.
H-3 Construction equipment will be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions.
H-5 The use of energy efficient lighting along Bristol Street (low pressure sodium vapor lights) will be
considered to reduce emissions at the power plant serving the area.
H-6 Traffic signals along Bristol Street will continue to be synchronized (AQMP control measures K2).
H-7 Construction activities will be halted during Stage One and Stage Two smog alerts.
Mitigation Measures: No additional new mitigation measures are required.
C) Result is a cu mudidively considerable net increase of my criteria pollutant for which the project
region is noroNtmmnent under an applicable federal or state mabient air quality standard
(inchudiwg releasing emissions which exceed quantitative Ihresholdsfor ozone precursors)?
The SCAB is designated by the EPA and the State as being nonattainment for 03, PM,,, and PM,,. In accordance
with SCAQMD methodology, any project that does not exceed or can be mitigated to less than the daily threshold
values does not add significantly to a cumulative impact As mentioned above, the development of the proposed
Project demonstrates that construction and operational activities would not result in emissions in excess of
SCAQMD's threshold values. Since the proposed Project would not exceed the SCAQMD's significance thresholds
for construction activities or the operations phase, the SCAQMD does not consider emissions from the Project's
emissions to add significantly to any cumulative impact Furthermore, it should be noted that the proposed Project
would improve traffic flow, reduce idling, and encompass the same amount of road capacity for with the existing
lane configuration. As such, the Project would continue to result in a beneficial impact Implementation of the
proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures H-1 through H-3
and H-5 through H-7.
Mitigation Measures: No additional new mitigation measures are required.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substmhdal pollutant concentrations?
A project could have the potential to expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations if it would cause
or contribute substantially to elevated pollutant concentration levels or place the project in an area with elevated
pollutant concentrations. An evaluation of air pollutant emissions as it affects local sensitive receptors has been
conducted for both the construction and operations phases of the Project As per the 1990 FEIS/EIR, it was
determined that sensitive receptors in the vicinity appeared to experience carbon monoxide levels that exceeded state
and federal standards. Additionally, it was found that under future conditions with the Bristol Street Widening
Project, sensitive land uses adjacent to the intersections analyzed reduced carbon monoxide levels to less than
significant once the sensitive receptors were setback far enough from the intersections. It was also noted that the
carbon monoxide concentrations were only analyzed during "worst case" conditions and did not reflect
concentrations which were more likely to occur which would be less than significant compared to what was
observed. The Project configuration, which was also analyzed as part of the 1990 FEIS/EIR, would serve to
increase traffic flow through the intersection, but would not increase the overall road capacity compared to the 1990
FEIS/EIR, and would not result in an increase in the pollutant concentrations near sensitive receptors, as previously
analyzed the 1990 FEIS/EIR. In addition, as determined in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, the proposed modifications would
increase traffic flow and reduce traffic idling which would decrease vehicle emissions. Implementation of the
proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Final I December 2017 3-6 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures H-1 through H-3
and H-5 through H-7.
Mitigation Measures: No additional new mitigation measures are required.
e) Create objectionable odorsrffecting asubstmetialmunber ofpeople7
Construction activities associated with the proposed Project may generate detectable odors from heavy-duty
construction equipment and exhaust Odors associated with diesel and gasoline fumes are transitory in nature and
would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The impacts from these odors would
be short-term, would cease upon Project completion, and are not anticipated to be significant Implementationofthe
proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional new mitigation measures are required.
This section cohresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mdigation
Akasures, SubsectionE,SireambedAlodoicotion.
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect either directly or through habitat modifications; on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulatdons, or by the Caldfornia Depmbnent of Fish and Gane or US Fish and Wddtdfe Service?
The Project site is located within a highly -urbanized area within the City of Santa Ana. No sensitive natural habitat
or special -status species exist on or in the vicinity of the proposed Project Implementation of the proposed Project
would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any rdpmian habitat or other sensitive natural communhy
identified in Local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CaVornia Deportment of Fish
andCnme or US Fish and Wddhfe Service?
Refer to Response 3.4m). No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities are identified in the Project
vicinity. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the
1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands us defused by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act linchsding, bad sat limited to, morfshg vernal pool coastal etc) through direct
removal filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Refer to Response 3.4m). No federally protected wetlands are identified in the Project area or vicinity. The
proposed Project is located within a highly -urbanized area of the City of Santa Ana. Implementation of the
proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Final I December 2017 3-7 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
aq Interfere substantaIIy wi k the movement of my native resident or migraoryfuh or Wdlafe species
or wi k established nave resident or migratory wedhfe corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
As the proposed Project is located within a highly -urbanized area of the City of Santa Ana, the Project would not
interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites, as time are located within the Project area. Implementation of the proposed Project
would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Confect with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
The proposed Project may result in the removal of existing landscaping including trees. As such, removal or
planting of trees is required to comply with the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code, Chapter 33, Article VII,
Regulation ofthe Pleading, Mmnferxmce, and Removal of Trees. With compliance with the City's Municipal Code,
the proposed Project would not conflict with the City's tree ordinance Implementation of the proposed Project
would notresult in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable.
Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures arerequired.
,n Conflict wdh the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Pliny Natural Community
ConservatlonPlary or other approvedlocal. regional orstae habitacomervadoaplan?
The Project site is not located within a habitat conservation plan. Implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation
Akasures, Subsection T, Cultural Resources.
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantia adverse change in the signirwavice of a historical resource in defined in
§]5064.5?
No structure modification would result with implementation of the Project Furthermore, the proposed Project
would only require limited depths of excavations (maximum depth of 10 feet). Although the majority of excavation
is anticipated to occur in non-native fill materials, should unknown potential historical resources be uncovered,
implementation of mitigation measure T-1 in the previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR would reduce impacts to less
than significant levels. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Final I December 2017 3-8 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures:
T-1 If potential archaeological resources are encountered during grading all work will be halted in that
particular location until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the recovered
materials.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures arerequired.
b) Cause a substantial adverse charge in the .ngnrcance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §
]5064.5?
Due to the limited area of disturbance, within an existing developed and urban area, and limited depth of proposed
excavations, the potential to uncover archaeological resources is considered low. The proposed Project would not
result in archaeological impacts greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures T-1.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Directly or hulaectlydestroy auniguepaleontological resource or site or unique geologicfeature?
As documented in Chapter VI, Resources Element, of the County of Orange General Plan, the Project site is not
located in an area of paleontological sensitivity. Soils occurring in the Project area are San Emigdio.s Typically,
these deposits are less than 10,000 years old, and not likely to contain important fossils.' No greater impacts to
paleontological resources than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/E[R would resultfrom Project implementation.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures arerequired.
d) Disturb any hanan remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
The Project site is located within a highly -urbanized area within the City of Santa Ana. Cathedral Memorial
Gardens is located approximately 2 miles north-west of the Project site In the event that human remains are
uncovered during grading or excavation, contractors are required to comply with the procedures and requirements
set forth in the California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and CPRC Section 2098.98. The County Coroner
and, in the event that the remains are Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission would be
notified and, in tum, would notify those persons believed to be most likely descended from the deceased for
appropriate disposition of the remains. The proposed Project would not result in an impact to human remains
greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
This section corresponds with the following 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences aro!
Mfigadon Measures, subsections:
• Subsection A, Landform Aloahficadon;
• Subsection 13, Seismic Hozards;
8 United States Department of Agriculture, Web Soil �vey, htips://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoil
Suivey.aspx, accessed August 2,2017.
9 Ibid
Final I December 2017 3-9 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
• Subsection C, Erosion Impacts; and
• Subsection F, Water Qfrality.
Would the project:
a) F_ hose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss i%huy,
or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fau15 as delineates on the most recent Alguist-priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologht for the area or based on other substantial evidence
of akamvufault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special publication 42.
The City of Santa Ana is not included in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map10. The Project site is not
underlain by an active fault The closest faults are the II Modeno Fault, approximately eight miles to the northeast
and the Newport -Inglewood Fault approximately 15 miles to the southwest The proposed Project would not result
in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/IIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
ii) Strong seismic groundshaking?
The EI Modeno fault is the closest fault to the Project site and is the most likely source of ground shaking impacts".
The Project proposes intersection improvements and would not expose people or structures to adverse ground
shaking impact The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990
FE IIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures arerequired.
iia Seismic -re Adedgroundfahure, including liquefaction?
According to the City's General Plan, the Project site is identified as having high -medium liquefaction potential.
However, the Project does not propose any new habitable structures. Implementation of 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation
Measure B-2, to replace surface level structures with structures that have extensive subsurface footings (such as
traffic signals) that reach stable material would reduce any structural impacts from ground failure to less than
significant The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990
FE IIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures:
B-2 Consideration will be given to installing and replacing surface level structures such as street lights,
traffic signals and utility poles, with structures that have extensive subsurface footings that reach stable
material.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
iv) Landslides?
The proposed Project site is generally flat and does not contain any significant slopes. The proposed Project would
not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/IIR.
10 City of Santa Ana, City of&anta A a General Plan, adopted September 1982, as amended.
11 California Geological Survey, Fault Activity Map of California, hfp://maps.croservafim.ca.gov/cgs/faM
App/index.html, accessed August 3, 2017.
Final I December 2017 3-10 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Certified 1990 FRIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Exposure of barren rock and soil surfaces during coustmction would result in soil erosion. However, considering
the slight gradient, the anticipated erosion impact would be nominal. The proposed Project would not result in
greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FRIS/EIR Mitigation Measures:
C-2 Straw or other suitable materials will be placed over uncovered soils, as needed, during street
construction activities. This would reduce the amount of erosion.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable us a result of
the project and potentially result in on- or off-site IandvHde, lateral sprealmg, subsidence,
Hguefactum or collapse?
The 1990 FEIS/EIR indicated t hatthere are no instances of undisturbed, natural soils. TheProject site located in an
area identified as having high to medium subsidence for liquefaction. However, the Project area is fully developed
with urban uses within the City of Santa Ana and the proposed Project would be constructed in accordance with the
standards of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Implementation of 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measure B-2, to
replace surface level structures with stmcMres that have extensive subsurface footings that reach stable material
would reduce any structural impacts from ground failure to less than significant. The proposed Project would not
create greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FRIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure B-2.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Be located on expansive soil as defused in Table ]8-]-B of the Unafbrm Building Code (1994),
creafing substantial risks to bye or properly?
The proposed Project would not include construction of any habitable stmcmres nor would the Project increase the
number of persons at the Project site Thus, the proposed Project would not create substantial risks to life or
property and the proposed Project would not create greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FRIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure B-2.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Have saZv incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste wader
disposal systems where sewers are rat avatablefor the disposal ofwaste seater?
The proposed Project would not generate any sewage or wastewater and would not require installation of any septic
tanks or altemative wastewater systems. No impacts are anticipated in this regard and the proposed Project would
not create greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FRIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
Final I December 2017 3-11 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR did not include evaluation for Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, as such
an analysis was not required in the CEQA guidelines at the time the 1990 FEIS/EIR was prepared.
On September 6, 1990, the City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency certified the 1990 FEIS/EIR that analyzed the
potential impacts associated with the Bristol Street Widening Project, which focused on improvements that would
result in proposed widening of Bristol Street, from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane, in the City of Santa Ana.
Although this previous environmental document did not include a GHG analysis, a supplemental environmental
analysis of GHG impacts cannot be required absent new information on that front (Citizens for Responsible
Equitable Environmental Development [CREED] v. City of San Diego, [2011] 196 Ca1.App.4th 515, 531.)
Information on the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on climate was known long before the City approved the
1990 FEIS/EIR. (Id.) Thus, the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on climate could have been raised in 1990 when
the City considered the FEIS/EIR. A challenge to a FEIS/EIR must be brought within 30 days of the lead agency's
notice of approval. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21167[b].) Under Public Resources Code section 21166(c), an agency
may not require a supplemental environmental review unless new information, which was not known and could not
have been known at the time the FEIS/EIR was approved, becomes available After a project has been subjected to
environmental review, the statutory presumption flips in favor of the project proponent and against further review.
(Moss v. County of Humboldt [2008] 162 Ca1.App.4th 1041, 1049-1050.) "`[S]ectim 21166 comes into play
precisely because in-depth review has already occurred [and] the time for challenging the sufficiency of the original
EIR has long since expired."' (Id., 1050.) There is no competent evidence of new information of severe impact, and
thus the City may rely on an addendum. Accordingly, the City fords that GHG impacts and climate change are not
"new information" under Public Resources Code Section 21166.
Would the project:
a) Gemerate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a *nificamt impact
on the environment?
GHG were not evaluated in the 1990 FEIS/EIR Construction activities would consume fuel and result in the
generation of GHG emissions. Construction of the Project is anticipated to occur over a one-year period.
Construction -related GHG emissions would cease upon completion of the Project Due to the length of construction
activities, GHG emissions associated with construction activities are anticipated to be minimal. Because
construction emissions are not substantial and would cease atter completion of construction, GHG emissions would
not be significant
Furthermore, the Project proposes acquiring additional ROW from what was originally analyzed in the 1990
FEIS/EIR. The additional ROW would not change the roadway capacity or over all lane configuration from what
was analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. As the Project involves roadway improvements and not a trip generating land
use, only carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from mobile -sources are applicable Similar to the other criteria
pollutants, the highest emissions would occur between 0 to 10 miles per hour (mph) and 50 mph and above The
proposed Project would improve traffic flow and reduce idling. Because the Project would improve traffic flow
within the Project area, the Project would result in reduced CO2 emissions. Modifications involving additional
ROW would not result in a change to the road capacity, lane configuration, and impacts that were identified in the
1990 FEIS/EIR. GHG emissions would be nominal in relation to the global scale of GHG emissions, and there is no
evidence that mitigation is necessary for the Project modifications to further demonstrate compliance with the GHG
reduction targets of Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 32. Consequently, GHG emissions associated with the Project
would be less than significant.
Certifled 1990 FRIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Final I December 2017 3-12 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
b) ConJGct wth an applicable plm5 policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions ofgreenhouce gases?
In December 2015, the City of Santa Ana adopted the Climate Action Plan (CAP) as a commitment to improving
quality of life by reducing carbon pollution and energy use, both from its own operations and from the community
as a whole To develop this CAP, an inventory was conducted to determine baseline GHG emissions from the
community and from municipal operations for calendar year 2008. A forecast was made of business -as -usual
emissions in the absence of any emissions reduction actions. This forecast was then adjusted to account for the
emissions reduction expected from statewide policies and from actions that have already been taken by the City
since the baseline inventory. Based on community input, suggestions from City staff, analysis of other
communities' climate action plans, and consultant recommendations, a list of measures to reduce emissions was
developed. Reaching the emissions reduction goals will require residents, businesses, and City govemment to wodc
together. The result will be reduced traffic congestion, improved air quality, lower energy use and cost, and
improved quality of life for the entire community. The following measures from the CAP are applicable to the
proposed Project:
• Traffic Signal Synchronization Program: Coridors with synchronized and coordinated traffic signals tend
to have shorter travel times, less delay, and reduced congestion. These factors combine reduced fuel usage
and emissions. Improvements of intersection operations would help achieve City reduction goals by
reducing idling emissions, decreasing congestion and improving traffic flow.
• Design Guidelines for Intemal Pedestrian Connectivity: Intemal pedestrian connections such as a sidewalk
within a site are an important factor in facilitating non -automotive travel. The level of connectivity relates
to the ability to travel within the site to other locations without having to use vehicles or an extemal
roadway network which decrease emissions.
As noted above, the Project would widen the Bristol Street ROW to accommodate a planned roadway/intersection
improvement The Project would improve traffic flow, reduce idling emissions, thereby reducing GHG emissions.
The proposed Project would not conflict with the CAP because it would not increase GHG emissions. The Project
would also implement the appliance CAP measures noted above and would further decrease emissions through
traffic signal synchronization and the design of an internal pedestrian sidewalk. The Project modifications would
not conflict with CAP reduction targets.
Additionally, the proposed Project would not conflict with applicable plans, policy, or regulations adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG. The proposed Project would result in improved traffic flow, reduced
vehicle idling times, and congestion. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in new impacts
pertaining to GHG emissions.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
This section coresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation
Akarures, Subsection V, Construction Impacts, and Subsection X, Hazardous Materials.
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine trampor5 use, or
disposal ofhayardous materials?
The proposed intersection improvements would require relocation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, driveway approaches,
and both public and private utilities (including the existing traffic signal). Any removal of roadway pavement
striping will be required to be surveyed for lead-based paint prior to removal, in compliance with the applicable
local, state, and federal regulations administered through the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health.
Final I December 2017 3-13 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
No other routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials is anticipated as a result of the proposed Project
Thus, compliance with existing regulations would ensure that impacts are not greater than that previously analyzed
in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Create a sighujsemd hnymrd to the public or the environment through reasonablyforeseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release ofhasardous materials into the environment?
As listed in Table 1 Proposed Properiv Acquisition, a total of three Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs) (002-261-
06, -29, and -30) would be partially acquired as a result of the proposed intersection improvements; refer to Exhibit
5 Proposed Meht-of- 4PavAcaearition. All proposed areas of acquisition include vacantportions of commercial and
multi -family residential properties. These vacant areas consist of bare soils, paving/asphalt, or omamental
landscaping. Based on information maintained by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), APN 002-
261-06 (currently a vacant disturbed property located at 2702 N. Bristol Street) was historically Chevron Service
Station #9-8787.12 On January 28, 1999, three 10,000 -gallon gasoline underground storage tanks (USTs) and one
1,000 -gallon used oil UST were removed from the property.
According to the SWRCB, a release from the USTs, clarifier, sump, and degreaser were reported during tank
removal. Site characterization of potential contaminates was completed and, based on groundwater monitoring,
determined that only the soil was affected above regulatory thresholds. Contaminated soils were excavated.
Based on a case closure letter issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), dated
October 22, 2001, completion of the site investigation, remedial action, and groundwater monitoring was
completed.13 No further action related to the reported release is required based on the current land use
According to the 1990 FEIS/EIR, ROW impacts to businesses that may generate hazardous waste or sites that
contain underground storage tanks will occur with implementation of the preferred altemative The 1990 FEIS/EIR
acknowledged that it is likely that implementation of the prefered altemative would require the removal of USTs or
aboveground storage tanks, or modifications to sites that have historically been handling, processing, or storing
hazardous materials. Such activities have the potential to release hazardous wastes into the air or into the ground,
but standard construction practices, which would involve careful coordination of design plans or prior notification of
construction activity, are expected to minimize these risks and to minimize any disruptions. Thus, compliance with
existing regulations and the 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures would ensure that impacts are not greater than that
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures:
X-1 The City of Santa Ana's Public Works Director will coordinate closely with all agencies and
companies which maintain underground or at -grade utility or energy facilities within the areas to be
disturbed by project construction activities. Preliminary and final design plans will be made available
to such agencies for review and comment At least 48 hours prior to commencement of any excavation
activities, the City will contact the Underground Service Alert to notify the affected utility/energy
purveyors who can place their personnel at the excavation site to assist in the location of underground
facilities during the exploratory digging immediately preceding excavation. In this manner, the risk of
line rupture to natural gas, petroleum, and sewer facilities, which might release hazardous substances
and odors in to the air, can be minimized.
X-2 Should any unidentified substances, odors, leaking underground tanks, or other mysterious and
potentially hazardous materials be encountered during project construction, work in that area will be
halted and the Santa Ana Fire Department's Hazardous Materials Team will be contacted to evaluate
the materials and to define appropriate remedial measures.
12 State Water Resources Control Board, G oZ acker, hltp://geoftacker.watefbouds.ca.gov/, accessed July 24, 2017.
13 Ibid
Final December 2017 3-14 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
X-3 The removal of underground storage tanks will be in accordance with all applicable regulations. For
any service stations that will be partially acquired or displaced, the City will request that the owners
remove the underground gasoline tanks prior to property acquisition. If the owners do not remove the
underground tanks, the City will include the following statement in the right-of-way agreement:
"It is understood the property being acquired in this transaction may contain hazardous waste
which must be removed or otherwise treated under state or federal Law to protect the public
health. If hazardous waste is found to exist on the property, the State may exercise its right to
bring an action, if necessary, to recover clean-up costs from the grantors or any others who
are ultimately determined to have responsibility for the hazardous waste condition of the
property."
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Emd hmardous emissions or handle hgardous or widely haardaus materials, substances, or waste
wBd n one-quarter alto of an existing orproposedschool?
The schools closest to the Project site are Santiago Elementary School (located approximately 0.46 mile south at
2212 N. Baker Street, Santa Ana) and Riverdale Elementary School (located approximately 0.60 mile west at 13222
Lewis Street, Garden Grove). Thus, no schools are located within one-quarter mile of the Project site and impacts
would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a ltst of hn¢ardaus materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and as a result muddit create askgm1wannt haardto the public
or the environment?
The Project site includes a former service station where gasoline was reported to have contaminated the soil; the site
completed site remediation through appropriate state and local agency standards as required. To that end, the
RW QCB issued a case closure letter dated October 22, 2001 stating that no further action was required for the site
As discussed in Response 3.8(b), compliance with existing regulations and mitigation measures from the 1990
FEIS/EIR would ensure that impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures X-1 through X-3.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
e) For a project located within an airport Iau1 use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted
wBd n tiro miles of apubltc airport or public use airport would the project result in a safety has ard
for people residing or working in the project area?
The Project site is not within an airport land use plan. The closest airport to the site is John Wayne—Orange County
Airport, located approximately 5.9 miles southeast of the Project site The proposed Project would not introduce
any new risks or increase risks associated with the Project Impacts in this regard would not be greater than that
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
Final I December 2017 3-15 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
,) For a project within the vicinity of aprivate airship, would the project result is a safety hasardfor
people residing or working in the project area?
The Project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip and would not create any safety hazard. The proposed
Project would not create additional significant impact Impacts in this regard would not be greater than that
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
g) Impair implementation of or physwaIIy utterfere wide an adapted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
During construction, the disruption of traffic and access along Bristol Street and Memory lane would temporarily
affect the mobility of emergency vehicles. However, provisions would be made for interim access through the
Project corridor and to adjoining properties; traffic control plans would be prepared detailing provisions for
vehicular movement and access through the Project corridor during construction. Advance warning and information
signs would be used to inform motorists during the construction process. It is expected that two-way travel would
be maintained along Bristol Street during construction. Although the proposed Project may interfere with an
emergency evacuation plan, it would be short term during construction and mobility would improve once the Project
is completed. Compliance with mitigation measures from the 1990 FEIS/EIR would ensure that impacts are not
greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures
V-10 Traffic control plans will be prepared prior to each phase of construction. All traffic warning and
control devices should comply to the provisions of the State of Califomia Manual of Traffic Controls.
V-12 Thepolice and fire departments will benotified of construction at least one (1) month in advance, as to
the particulars of the project (i.e., project time schedule, and areas to be dismpted, etc.). This action
would give the police and fire departments sufficient time to notify its personnel of any significant
impediments to traffic.
V-13 The City will notify the police department at least 48 hours in advance of any turning changes. A
minimum three (3) signs are required for each indicated change and/or prevention of movement
V-16 If feasible, construction activities and lane closures will occur primarily during non -peak driving
periods.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
h) Expose people or shvchwes to a significant risk of Loss, ugury or death uwolvurg midland fines,
inchu ing where midlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed wide
wildlands?
The proposed Project is located in a highly -urbanized area of the City of Santa Ana. There are no wildlands in the
Project vicinity and no new significant impacts would result with Project implementation. Impacts in this regard
would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
Final I December 2017 3-16 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
This section corresponds with the following 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and
Afiifigadon Measures, subsections:
• Subsection C, Erosion Impacts,
• Subsection D,Floodplain/Floodway Ewroochnent, and
• Subsection F, Water Qrality.
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirementr?
Under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the EPA has established regulations under the NPDES program
to control direct storm water discharges. Should 1.0 acre or more of site disturbance occur, those activities would be
subject to the NPDES program for the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The proposed Project
would only impact approximately 0. 39 acres, which is less than the 1.0 -acre threshold. Thus, the Project would not
be subject to NPDES requirements, as potential waste discharge would be nominal. Furthermore, the Project would
be required to comply with the 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure C-2, involving the placement of straw or other
suitable materials over uncovered soils, as needed, during street coustruction activities, further reducing the amount
of erosion occurring at the Project site Regarding operations, the Project would not increase the capacity of the
roadway or the number of vehicles using the Project area. Therefore, impacts to water quality would be similar to
those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure C-2.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
Al Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such but there would be anet deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not
support ezisfing Ianduces or plannedusesfor whiehpermits have beengranten)?
The proposed Project would not result in increased water consumption and would not deplete groundwater supplies.
No impact to groundwater supplies would result from the proposed Project Impacts in this regard would not be
greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Substantially after the ezisfing drainage pattern of the site or area including through the afteradon
of the course of a sueam or river, in a mmmer that would result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site ?
The proposed Project would only nominally increase the paved/impervious areas of the Project site. This nominal
increase would not result in a substantial increase in erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Further, implementation of
1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure C-2 would reduce any potential erosion/siltation impacts during construction.
Thus, impacts in this regard would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure C-2
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
Final I December 2017 3-17 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
d) Substantially alter the existing dramige pattern ofthe she or area ntchu ing through the alteration
of fixe course of a sheer, or river, or substantially increase the rate or amoa id of surface rammQrin a
manner that would result inflooding on- or QQ=sde?
Currently, theProject site only includes curb and no catch basin is present As a result, seasonal ponding does occur
along this portion of Bristol Street The proposed Project would result in a nominal increase in impervious ground
surfaces. However, development of the Project would result in the relocation of the existing curb features at the
Project site Thus, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase compared to the
existing condition. Further, Project development may include extension of the existing storm water pipeline system
(located on the eastern side of Bristol Street) through a new lateral connection and new catch basin at the Project
site These improvements, if constructed, would result in a reduction of existing flooding and would be a beneficial
impact Thus, impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Create or contribute runoff seater which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm
seater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources ofpohhrtednmof/7
Refer to Response 3.9(a). Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR
Cerfifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
,) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Refer to Response 3.9(a). Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR
Cerfifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
g) Place homing withinn700-yearfloodhayard area inmapped on afederal F7oodAayardBoaunday
or F7oodlnsurance Rate Map or otherfloodhayarddelineation map?
The Project site is located outside of the 100 -year flood zone." Further, the proposed Project would not construct
any housing. Therefore, no impact would result from the proposed Project in this regard. Impacts would not be
greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures arerequired.
h) Place within nl00yeaifloodhasardarea structures which would impede or redhectfloodflows?
Refer to Response 3.9(g). Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Cerfified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
14 Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA Flood Map ;Service Center, hltps://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?
AddressQuery—memory%201anO/aC%20smta%20ana#searctvesWtsmchor, accessed August 3,2017.
Final I December 2017 3-18 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
i) Expose people or sbvctures to a significant risk of Loss, injury or death irwolvhV flooding,
includingflooding as aresult of thefuhue of ¢levee trouts?
The proposed Project does not involve the construction of new habitable structures or people at the Project site
Therefore, the Project would not expose people or habitable structures to a significant flooding risk beyond that
which already exists. Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures arerequired.
j) Inundation by seiche, hununi, or muojlow?
The Project site is located approximately 15 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean; therefore, the likelihood of
tsunami impacting the site is minimal. The Project site and vicinity are highly urbanized and there are no nearby
water bodies or unusual slopes or geologic features in the area. No impacts involving seiche, tsunami, or mdflow
are anticipated. Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measure: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation
Alearures, Subsection A, Landform Modification.
Would the project:
a) physicaby divide an established commundy?
The proposed Project involves the widening of the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane; the proposed
Project would not divide an established community. Although the proposed widening of Bristol Street within the
Project limits would result in partial acquisition of existing properties, the Project would not create a physical barrier
to, or separate, a community. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Coaket mitt my applicable Iced use plus policy, or regulation of an agency svth jurisdiction over
the project (including, bid not limited to the general plus specfic plus Local coastal program, or
Eonueg ordtseuece) adoptedfor the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
According to the City of.SardaAm General Plan (General Plan), the Project area is designated General Commercial
(GC) and Low Density Residential (LDR-7). The zoning designation of properties within the Project area are
Speck Development (SD27) which is developed as the Portofino Apartments and Community Commercial (Cl)
which allows for retail and service uses. The proposed Project would not result in changes to the land use
designation ofthe acquired parcels. The proposed Project is in compliance with the existing designations and would
not create a new conflict It is acknowledged that due to building setback requirements, the Project would require
approval from the City Manager for landscape strip Exceptions for building setbacks per Municipal Code Section
41-781. With City Manager approval, the Project would be consistent with the Municipal Code requirements. No
significant impacts would result and impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Final I December 2017 3-19 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Coahet with any applicable habitatconservation plan or natural community conservation plaut?
The Project site is not a part of any habitat conservation plan, and is located within a highly -urbanized area within
the City of Santa Ana. The proposed Project would not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural
community. No impact is anticipated. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990
FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation
Akasures, Subsection W, Consumption of Renewable and Non -Renewable Resources.
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of avaiabltlty of ak nmvn mineral resource ofvalue to the region and the residents
of the state?
The Project site is currently developed and does not contain any areas that are utilized for the extraction of mineral
resources. Furthermore, the proposed Project would not involve excavation that would likely identify previously
unidentified mineral resources. No impact to mineral resources would result from the proposed Project Impacts
would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Result in the loss of avalabr7ity, of a locally -imported mineral resource recovery site delineated on a
loealgeneral play specific plan or other land me plan?
The Project site is curenfly developed and is not delineated as a mineral resources recovery site by the City's
General Plan. Implementation of the proposed Project would have no impact on the mineral resources and no
mitigation measures are necessary. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990
FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures arerequired.
3.12 NOISE
This section coresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation
Akasures, Subsection I, Mire, and Subsection V, Condructionlapaciv
Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Final I December 2017 3-20 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
The proposed Project involves widening the west side of Bristol Street, north of the intersection of Bristol Street and
Memory Lane, in an urbanized area of multi- and single-family residential uses, commercial uses, and vacant land.
The widening of the proposed ROW from 100 feet to 111 feet will not substantially change the noise levels which
were analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Changes to traffic noise impacts typically occur when there is a substantial
horizontal alteration to the roadway. The Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol guidance per federal regulations
(23 CFR 772) defines a substantial horizontal alteration as a project that halves the distance between the traffic noise
source and the closest receptor between the existing condition to the frmre build condition. The existing distance
from the ROW to the closest receptor is approximately 30 feet When adding the additional 11 feet to the ROW, this
is less than half of the distance which means that the Project does not cause a substantial horizontal alteration. The
Proposed Project modifications would not result in any new long -tern mobile and stationary noise impacts. Only
nominal changes to grading or construction activities would occur. No increases to road vehicle capacity would
occur. No new impacts have been identified and no new mitigation measures are required. Impacts would not be
greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures
I-1 Construction activities will take place only during the hours specified in the City of Santa Ana Noise
Control Ordinance to reduce noise impacts during more sensitive time periods.
I-2 All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000 feet of a dwelling shall be equipped
with properly operating and maintained muffler exhaust systems.
I-3 Stationary equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise
receivers such as residential areas.
I-4 Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far as practical from occupied dwellings.
I-5 Every effort will be made to create the greatest distance between noise sources and receptors during
construction.
I-6 The noisiest construction operations will be aranged to occur together in the coustruction program to
avoid continuing periods of greater annoyance
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive grouadborae vibration or groundborne noise
Levels?
Refer to Response 3.12(a). During Project construction, noise associated with construction may intermittently
dominate the noise environment in the immediate area of construction. No additional adverse noise impacts from
construction are anticipated as construction would comply with the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code, which limits
construction noise to the least noise sensitive portions of the day. Construction equipment would be properly fitted
and maintained according to the manufacturer's specifications. Furthermore, construction noise would be short-
term, temporary, and cease upon completion of the proposed Project Impacts would be similar to those identified in
the 1990 FEIS/EIR with implementation of mitigation measures and would not be greater than what was previously
analyzed.
The proposed widening of Bristol Street and ROW acquisition just north of Memory Lane would involve additional
ROW take at adjoining properties in order to accommodate the third southbound through lane (considered in the
1990 FEIS/EIR). These changes would be nominal and would result in similar noise levels as the 1990 FEIS/EIR,
which would be below significant levels. The Proposed Project modifications would not result in any new long-
term mobile and stationary noise impacts. No changes to grading or construction activities would occur. No
increases to road vehicle capacity or lane configurations would occur. No new impacts have been identified and no
new mitigation measures are required. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990
FEIS/EIR.
Final I December 2017 3-21 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) A substantial permanent increase is ambient noise levels is the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
Refer to Responses 3.12(a) and 3.12(6). Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990
FFIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required.
14 A substantial tempormy or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
Levels existing without the project?
Refer to Response 3.12(a), for discussion regarding temporary noise impacts associated with Project coustmction.
Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures I-1 through I-6.
Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required.
e) For a project located within as airport laud use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted
within two miles of apubtc airport or public use airport wouldthe project expose people residing or
mmking in the project areata excessive noise levels?
The Project site is not located within an airport land use plan. The nearest airport is the John Wayne — Orange
County Airport, located approximately 5.9 miles from the proposed Project No impacts would occur. Impacts
would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required.
,) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, wuhdd the project ¢spas¢ people residing or
worlung in the project areata excessive noise levels?
Refer to Response 3.12(e). The proposed Project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Impacts
would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required.
3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING
This section corresponds with the following 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and
Mfigadon Medssures, subsections:
• Subsection L, Population;
• Subsection M, Housing Displacement;
• Subsection N, Business Displacement,
• Subsection 0, Impacts on Neighborhood Churacwr andMmority Groups; and
• Subsection R, Effict on Assessed Property Values.
Final I December 2017 3-22 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area either directly (jbr example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (jbr example, through extension of roads or other
mfrastrmeture)?
The proposed Project involves the partial acquisition of three parcels in order to widen Bristol Street, located within
a highly urbanized and built -out area. The proposed Project is designed to accommodate the existing and future
traffic volume and would not create new trips. The proposed Project would not result in additional impacts.
Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Displace substantial members of exiekng housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
A total of three properties would be partially acquired as a result of the proposed widening of Bristol Street All
proposed areas of acquisition include vacant portions of commercial and multi -family residential properties. These
vacant areas consist of paving/asphalt or ornamental landscaping. The acquisitions would comply with policies
pursuant to the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 as implemented
by the City of Santa Ana. No removal of housing would occur. Impacts would not be greater than that previously
analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Refer to Response 3.13(6). Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES
This section couesponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation
Alearures, Subsection P, Impacts on Community Facilities, and Subsection V, Construction Impacts.
a) Would the project result insubstantial adverse physical impacts associatedwith the provision ofnew
or physically altered governmental factitles, need for new or physically altered governmental
facaiites, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable serve ratios, response tunes or other performance objectives for my of the
public services:
i) Fire Protection?
The proposed Project includes intersection improvements and no increase in demand for fire protection services
would occur with implementation of the proposed Project Furthcunore, the proposed Project would result in
positive impacts as a result of greater congestion relief and increased mobility in the vicinity for motor vehicles
including emergency vehicles. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Final I December 2017 3-23 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Police Protection?
Refer to Response 3.14(a)(i). The proposed Project would not result in the need or increase the demand for police
services in the area. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Schools?
The proposed Project does not involve any new development and no new population would result Therefore, no
schools or school services would be impacted by the proposed Project Impacts would not be greater than that
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Parks?
The proposed Project does not involve any new development and no new population would result There are no
parks within the Project limits, and no needs for additional park services would occur as a result of the proposed
Project Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Otherpublicfactddes?
The proposed Project does not involve any new development and no new population would result Therefore, the
Project would not generate demands for other public facilities. Impacts would not be greater than that previously
analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3.15 RECREATION
This section coresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation
Akasures, Subsection P, Impact on Recreational Facilifies.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational factides such that substantial physical deterioration of the fwddy would occur or be
accelerated?
The proposed Project involves the widening of Bristol Street, just north of Memory Lane, to accommodate a third
southbound through lane within a highly urbanized and built -out area in the City. The widening of Bristol Street
would not induce growth, nor create demand for recreation -related services. Furthermore, the proposed Project
Final I December 2017 3-24 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
would not result in the physical deterioration of recreational facilities. No mitigation measures are required with
regards to recreational resources. Impacts would not be greater than thatpreviously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
Al Does the project include recreational fac>Tities or require the construction or expansion of
recreationalfacilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Refer to Response 3.15(a). The proposed Project does not include, nor would it require, construction or expansion
of recreational facilities. Therefore, no adverse physical impact on the environment would occur from such facilities
as a result of the proposed Project No mitigation measures are required. Impacts would not be greater than that
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
k%[cam III "MZ69141AfAdIs] :lYd'"JJN
This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, En ironmental Consequences and Mitigation
Aleasures, Subsection U, Impacts to Transportation Facilities, and Subsection V, Construcitonlmpacir.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the
Performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including
mass transit andnoromotont edhowel andrelevant components of the circulation system, including
but not limited to intersections, streets, highways andfreeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit?
The proposed Project is consistent with the applicable plans, ordinances and policies establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system as described in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. The widening of
Bristol Street was designated in the Orange County Master Plan, and was recommended in the Bristol Street
Corridor Study—Final Report, prepared by Motile, Grover & Associates, dated 1983. It was also recommended in
the Arterial Highway Element —.Banda Ana Element — Smta Am Transportation Corridor State H Alternative
Analysis, prepared by Parsons, Brinekerhoff, Quade and Douglas, Inc., dated 1983. The proposed Project is also
consistent with the recommendation found in the Intercity Liaison Committee — Five -Year Trmsportafion Study
Update to 1990, prepared by Basmaciyan-Darnell, Inc., dated 1985. Furthermore, the proposed Project would
improve traffic operations through the Project corridor. Based on traffic count data provided as part of the Akarure
Al2 Comprehensive Trmrportafion Fuming Program Call for Projects, prepared by the City of Santa Ana, for the
Orange County Transportation Authority, dated October 20, 2016, the existing Level of Service (LOS) at the Bristol
StreebMemory Lane intersection is LOS C in the AM Peak Hour and a LOS E during the PM Peak Hour. Upon
completion of the proposed Project, the Peak Hour LOS at this intersection would be improved to a LOS B in the
AM Peak Hour and a LOS D in the PM Peak Hour. Therefore, the Project would result in an overall beneficial
impact pertaining to traffic and would notbe greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, btelu ding, but not limited to level of
service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county
congestion management Weneyfor designatedroads or highways?
Final I December 2017 3-25 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
According to the 2015 Orange County Congestion Management Program, prepared by the Orange County
Transportation Authority, dated November 2015, the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane is not a CMP
intersection, nor is this intersection located along a CMP Highway System. Further, as discussed in Response
3.16(a), the proposed Project would result in an improvement to both the AM and PM Peak Hour LOS. As the
proposed Project would not increase the capacity of the roadway network, the Project would not result in greater
impacts than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Result it a charge in air tri0ho patterns, including either an increase it trios, levels or a charge it
location that results insubstantial safety risks?
The closest airport to the site is John Wayne—Orange County Airport, located approximately 5.9 miles southeast of
the Project site; the proposed Project would have no impact on air traffic patterns. The proposed Project would not
introduce any new risks or increase risks. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990
FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
d/ Substantially increase haards due tr a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
mterseedoma) or incompatible uses (e g., farm equipment)?
The proposed Project would improve the traffic flow at the Bristol Street and Memory Lane intersection and would
not create any sharp curves or other incompatible uses. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed
in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
The proposed Project would improve traffic operations along Bristol Street in the long -tern. During the
construction phase traffic flow along Bristol Street within the Project limits could be temporarily affected, including
the mobility of emergency vehicles; however, access, including two-way travel would be maintained through the
Project corridor during construction. Traffic control plans would be prepared prior to construction to facilitate
traffic movement through the Project corridor during construction. Although the proposed Project may interfere
with emergency access in the short -tern, it would improve emergency access once the Project is completed.
Implementation of 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures V-10, V-12, V-13 and V-16 would reduce impacts
associated with inadequate emergency access to a less than significant level. Impacts would notbe greater than that
previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures V-10, V-12, V-13,
and V-16.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
,) Conflict with adapted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit bicycle, or pedestrian
fzeiWes, or otherwise decrease the performance or safely of suchfacz7ities?
The proposed Project would not conflict with any alternative transportation plan and would increase safety
associated with improvements to the traffic operations through the Project area. The proposed Project would not
Final I December 2017 3-26 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
result in impacts greater than as described in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Impacts would not be greater than that previously
analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR
Certified 1990 FEIS/FIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
As of July 1, 2015, California Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) was enacted and expanded CEQA by establishing a formal
consultation process for California tribes within the CEQA process. The bill specifies that any project may affect or
cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource would require a lead agency to
"begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditional and culturally affiliated with the
geographic area of the proposed project" Section 21074 of AB 52 also defines a new category of resources under
CEQA called tribal cultural resources. Tribal cultural resources are defined as "sites, features, places, cultural
landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a Califomia Native American tribe" and is either listed
on or eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources or a local historic register, or if the lead agency
chooses to treat the resource as a tribal cultural resource.
Notwithstanding, AB 52 applies to all new applications deemed complete on or atter July 1, 2015. Thus, as the
proposed improvements are an Amendment to the existing Bristol Street Widening Project, and not a new
Application, AB 52 does not apply to this Project
On February 19, 2016, the Califomia Natural Resources Agency proposed to adopt and amend regulations as part of
AB 52 implementing Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations, CEQA Guidelines, to
include consideration of impacts to tribal cultural resources pursuant to Goverment Code Section 11346.6. On
September 27, 2016, the California Office of Administrative Law approved the amendments to Appendix G of the
CEQA Guidelines, and these amendments are addressed within this Addendum.
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse charge is the sigurwamce of a tribal cultural
resource, delured is Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural
landscape that is geographicalty defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to aCaVorniaNativeAmerlean tribe, morbid is:
i) Listed or eligible for Hsibur in the CaVornia Register ofllistorical Resources, or in alocal register
of hish,ric at resources an, deal el d in Pub He R e sourc e s Co de sectors 5020.1(k), or
According to the City of Santa Ana, no Native American -related historical resources are present within the Project
vicinity 15 Based on the 1990 FEIS/EIR, no historical or archaeological resources were identified in the Project
vicinity. During public noticing period for the Bristol Street Widening Project, a letter received from the Office of
Historic Preservation indicated that the Bristol Widening Project would not affect historic properties. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990
FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/FIR Mitigation Measures
T-1 If potential archeological resources are encountered during grading all work will be halted in that
particular location until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the recovered
materials.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
15 City of Santa Ana, Aopeoy Information march, htip://www.ci.smta-ma.ca.us/property-info/, accessed Anon 17,
2017
Final I December 2017 3-27 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
u) A resource determined by the lead agency, is its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significad pursued to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteriasetforth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024. 1,
the Lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American
tribe.
The Project is not subject to AB 52 and did not undergo the AB 52 Consultation Process. Notwithstanding the 1990
FEIS/EIR, no historical or archaeological resources were identified in the Project vicinity pertaining to Native
American resources. Further, during public noticing periods, letters received from the Office of Historic
Preservation indicated that the Bristol Widening Project would not affect historic properties. No correspondence
from any tribes were received during the 1990 FEIS/EIR. No new impacts have been identified. Should any
unknown tribal cultural resources be uncovered during grading/site disturbance activities, the Project would be
required to comply with the 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure T-1. Impacts in this regard would be less than
significant
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure T-1.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation
Aleasures, Subsection S, Effect on Utilities, and Subsection V, Construction Impacts.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater neabnent requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
The proposed Project entails intersection improvements; such improvements would not result in the generation of
wastewater. No new significant impact is anticipated. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed
in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
Z) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treabmentfaeaifiies or expansion of
existingfaefiities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
The proposed Project would not require or result in the constmetion of new water or wastewater treatment facilities
or expansion of existing facilities. No new significant impact is anticipated. Implementation of 1990 FEIS/EIR
Mitigation Measures V-14 and V-17 would reduce impacts to less than significant Impacts would not be greater
than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures:
V-14 Project plans and construction activities will be closely coordinated with local utility purveyors in
order to make the necessary arrangements for the relocation of facilities and avoid or minimize any
disruption to service. It is also recommended that the utilities provide adequate notice to its customers
of any service disruptions.
V-17 The City of Santa Ana's Public Works Director will coordinate closely with all agencies and
companies which maintain underground or at -grade utility or energy facilities within the areas to be
disturbed by project construction activities. Preliminary and final design plans will be made available
to such agencies for review and comment At least 48 hours prior to commencement of any excavation
activities, the City will contact the Underground Service Alert to notify the affected utility/energy
purveyors who can place their personnel at the excavation site to assist in the location of underground
Final I December 2017 3-28 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
facilities during the exploratory digging immediately preceding excavation. In this manner, the risk of
line rupture to natural gas, petroleum, and sewer facilities, which might release hazardous substances
and odors into the air, can be minimized.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
C) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage faefiities or expansion of existing
faca7ifies, the construction ofwhichcouldcause significant environmental effects?
As discussed in Response 3.9(d), the Project site curenty includes only curb and no catch basin is present As a
result, seasonal pouding does occur along this portion of Bristol Street The proposed Project would result in a
nominal increase in impervious ground surfaces. The Project would result in the relocation of the existing curb
features at the Project site and may include extension of the existing storm water pipeline system (located on the
eastern side of Bristol Street) through a new lateral connection and new catch basin at the Project site These
improvements, if constructed, would result in a reduction of existing flooding and would be a beneficial impact
Thus, impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/FIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
14 Have sii.Twient water suppHes available to serve the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
The proposed Project entails the intersection improvements; as such, the Project would not result in any increase in
water demand/cousumption. Landscape improvements, if applicable, would not require any new or expanded water
entitlements and would not be substantially increased, compared to that analyzed as part of the Bristol Street
Widening Project Thus, the proposed Project would not create any new significant environmental impact Impacts
would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/FIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that B has adequate capaeRy to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
Refer to Response 3.17(x) and 3.17(6). The proposed Project would not result in an increase in wastewater
production. Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certifled 1990 FEIS/FIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
,) Be served by a laiiafiff with sioLcient permitted capaerity to aeacommodate the project's solid wale
disposal needs?
The proposed Project would generate construction waste on a short -tern basis. Construction waste that cannot be
recycled would be taken to available landfills. The closest receiving landfills for the City are the Frank R.
Bowerman Sanitary Landfill at 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road in Irvine, and the Olinda Alpha Landfill at 1942N.
Valencia Avenue in Brea. The Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, which is owned and operated by the Orange
County Integrated Waste Management Department, opened in 1990, and has enough projected capacity to serve
residents and businesses until approximately 2053.16 The Olinda Alpha Landfill opened in 1960, and has enough
16 Orange County Waste and Recycling, Preek R. Bowerman Landfill, hltp://www.oclandfills.coMlmdfill/acfive/
bowennan, accessed August 17, 2017.
Final I December 2017 3-29 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
projected capacity to serve residents and businesses until approximately 2030.1/ Olinda's average disposal rate is
nearly 7,000 tons per day (TPD), although it permitted up to 8,000 TPD. Thus, these facilities have adequate
landfill capacity to serve the proposed Project and no new significant environmental impact would result from the
Project implementation. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
g) Comply wdhfederedstore, mulloeal starmesand regulations relatedto solid mule?
Refer to Response 3.18(f). The proposed Project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste. The Project would comply with the City of Santa Ana's established
reduction, reuse, and recycling programs. No new significant solid waste impact would result from the proposed
Project Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR.
Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.
3.19 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on this Addendum, the proposed Project has not substantially changed in regard to the setting, design,
impacts, and mitigation measures as described in the 1990 FEIS/EIR New circumstances or new information,
including any new or revised environmental laws, regulations, or policies have not modified the impacts of the
proposed Project
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment substaetatly reduce
the habitat of a fish or wtldhfe species, cause a fish or wtldhfe population lo drop below self-
suRaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or mhhnal commnmrtg substa thatly reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
The proposed Project would not result in impacts beyond those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR in this regard, and
does not have the potential to degrade the environment, reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, threaten plant
or animal communities, reduce or restrict endangered plant or animal species or eliminate important examples of
major periods of California history or prehistory with compliance with the 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually, tumind bad camelatvely considerable?
('Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of ¢project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects ofprobablefutu re projects)?
Given the nature and scope of the proposed Project, and in consideration of mitigation measures that are included in
the 1990 FEIS/EIR, the Project would not involve impacts that are cumulatively considerable
C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Construction -related activities are anticipated to have some relatively minor, temporary impacts which can be
mitigated with implementation of measures included in the 1990 FEIS/EIR Furthermore, potential long -tern
(operational) impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels through implementation of required 1990
FEIS/EIR mitigation measures.
Orange County Waste and Recycling, Olinda Alpha Landfill, hltp://www.oclandfills.coMlmdfill/acfive/
olindalandfill, accessed October 16, 2017.
Final I December 2017 3-30 Environmental Consequences
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
4.0 REFERENCES
The following references were utilized for the preparation of this Addendum:
California Depautuent of Conservation, Orange County Important Farmland 2014, ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/
FMMP/pdf/2014/ora14.pdf, accessed August 17, 2017.
California Depautuent of Transportation, California Scenic Highway Mapping System, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/
LandArch/16_ livability/scenic _highway s/index.turn, accessed August 30, 2017.
California Geological Survey, Fault Activity Map of California http://maps.croservatim.ca.gov/cgs/f"am/App/
index.html, accessed August 3, 2017.
City of Santa Ana, City ofSartaAna General Plan, adopted September 1982, as amended.
City of Santa Ana, Chywuk Design Gauktines.
City of Santa Ana, Final Enwronmental Impact statement (FSIs) for Bristol Street TIVirkning from Warner Avenue
to rbkmory Lane, dated 1990.
City of Santa Ana, Property Information Search, http://www.ci.santa-ma.ca.us/property-info/, accessed August 17,
2017.
City of Santa Ana, Measure M2 Comprehensive Transportation Funding Program Call for Projects, dated October
20, 2016.
Department of Conservation (DOC), Fault Activity Map of California http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fain/
App/index.html, accessed August 2017.
Department of Toxic Substances Control, ErmiroStor, http://www.mvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/, accessed August 2,
2017.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA Flood Map Service Center, https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?
AddressQuery� mory%201ane%2C%20smmO/o20ana#searchresultsanchor, accessed August 3, 2017.
Orange County Transportation Authority, 2015 Orange County Congestion Management Program, dated November
2015.
Orange County Waste and Recycling, Frank R. Bowerman Landfill, htfp://www.oclmdfills.com/lmdfilVacfive
bowertnan, accessed August 17, 2017.
Orange County Waste and Recycling Olinda Alpha Landfill, http://www.oclandfills.com/lmdfill/active/
olindalandfill, accessed October 16, 2017.
Google Earth, accessed September 2017.
POWER Engineers, Bristol Sbeet Widening Phase IIIA—Civic Center Drive to 4Pashington Avenue Environmental
Impact ReportAddendum, Janunty20, 2015.
Southern California Association of Governments, 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan✓Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), Transportation System Project List, 2016.
Southern Califomia Association of Governments, Final 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program, 2016.
Snue Water Resources Control Board, GeoTraker, http://geotracker.waterbouds.ca.gov/, accessed July 24, 2017.
Final I December 2017 4-1 References
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements —Project No. 17-6883
United States Department of Agriculture, Web Soil Se ey, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/AppAVebSoil
Survey.aspx, accessed August 2, 2017.
Final I December 2017 4-2 References
Appendix A
Modified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
Aloaifiedlmfial Study Checklist
The following Modified Initial Study Checklist is based on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Initial
Study Checklist It is modified to evaluate the proposed Project changes for which environmental impact
reports/statements have previously been completed to assist in the determination of the need for supplemental
environmental documents, in this case, a Subsequent or Supplemental EIS/FIR or an Addendum under Public
Resources Code 21166 and Guideline Sections 15162, 15163, and 15164, respectively. For purposes of this study,
references to "the proposal' in the lett hand column questions refer to the modifications to the Project (proposed
Project) as compared the Project improvements evaluated in the 1990 FEIS/EIR
The first four columns to the right of the modified checklist questions identify whether the proposed Project changes
would result in new impacts, and if so whether these impacts would be less than significant, less than significant
atter mitigation, or significant
The fifth column asks whether or not the impacts associated with Project changes, if any, were sufficiently disclosed
in the previous environmental documents.
Finally, the last column indicates whether or not a Subsequent or Supplemental FIR is needed. Moreover, a
Subsequent or Supplemental EIR would be needed if there were new significant unmitigated or substantially more
severe impacts, which would result from the Project changes and which were not sufficiently disclosed in the
previous environmental document.
Final I December 2017 1 Appendix A- Modified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 2 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
X
scenic vista?
YES
NO
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
X
YES
NO
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality ofthe site and its
X
YES
NO
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light
----
or glare, which would adversely affect day
X
YES
NO
or nighttime views in the area?
2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
X
YES
NO
Mapping and Monitoring Program ofthe
California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
......................
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
X
YES
NO
contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined
in Public Resources Code section
12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
X
YES
NO
Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code section
51104(8))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
- ---
conversionofforestlandtonon-forest
X
YES
NO
use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
.......
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
X
YES
NO
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non -forest
use?
3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
X
YES
NO
ofthe applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or
X
YES
NO
projected air quality violation?
Final I December 2017 2 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 3 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non -attainment
under an applicable federal or state
X
YES
NO
ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to
............
substantial pollutant concentrations?
X
YES
NO
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
- ---
substantialnumberofpeople?
X
YES
NO
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special -status species in local
X
YES
NO
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or
X
YES
NO
regional plans, policies, or regulations or
by the California Department of Fish and
Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
..
.................__.
---------------
.........
....
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 ofthe Clean Water Act
(including but not limited to, marsh, vernal
X
YES
NO
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
X
YES
NO
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
X
YES
NO
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
Final I December 2017 3 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 4 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
X
YES
NO
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource as
X
YES
NO
defined in § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
X
YES
NO
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
X
YES
NO
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
X
YES
NO
cemeteries?
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the
project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area
X
YES
NO
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?
..
X
................
.............
YES
NO
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
X
YES
NO
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
X
..
.......
_____
.........
YES
NO
....
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
X
YES
NO
loss Oftopsoil?
Final I December 2017 4 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 5 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become unstable
as a result of the project, and potentially
X
YES
NO
result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1-B ofthe Uniform Building
X
YES
NO
Code (1994), creating substantial risks to
life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
X
YES
NO
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have a
X
YES
NO
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose of
X
YES
NO
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
8. HAZARDS. Would the project involve:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine
X
YES
NO
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
X
YES
NO
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
..
.................
.........
....
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
X
YES
NO
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
X
YES
NO
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
Final I December 2017 5 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 6 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would
X
YES
NO
the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project
area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project result in a
X
YES
NO
safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
X
YES
NO
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where
X
YES
NO
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas
or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
X
YES
NO
waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering ofthe local groundwater table
X
YES
NO
level (e.g, the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level
that would not support existing land uses
or planned uses for which permits have
been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern ofthe site or area, including
through the alteration ofthe course of a
X
YES
NO
stream or river, in a manner that would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on -
or off-site?
Final I December 2017 6 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 7 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern ofthe site or area, including
through the alteration ofthe course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase
X
YES
NO
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner that would result in Flooding on- or
off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoffwater which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned storm water drainage systems or
X
YES
NO
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
X
YES
NO
quality?
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
X
YES
NO
Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard
area structures which would impede or
X
YES
NO
redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to
significant risk of loss, injury or death
X
YES
NO
involving flooding, including flooding as a
result ofthe failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
X
YES
NO
mudflow?
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would
the project:
a) Physically divide an established
X
YES
NO
community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use
plan, policy, or regulation of an agency
with jurisdiction over the project (including,
but not limited to the general plan, specific
X
YES
NO
plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
..
........
---------------
.........
....
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
X
YES
NO
conservation plan?
Final I December 2017 7 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 8 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Wouldthe
project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of
X
YES
NO
value to the region and the residents of the
state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally -important mineral resource recovery
X
YES
NO
site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
12. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of
noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
X
YES
NO
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or
X
YES
NO
groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
X
YES
NO
above levels existing without the project?
..
.................
.........
....
d) A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the
X
YES
NO
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would
X
YES
NO
the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
Final I December 2017 8 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 9 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project expose
X
YES
NO
people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
13. POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
X
YES
NO
indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
X
YES
NO
replacement housing elsewhere?
_
_--- -------------------------
---------
c)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of
X
YES
NO
replacement housing elsewhere?
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the
project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance
objectives for any ofthe public services:
a) Fire protection?
X
..
.................__.
---------------
.........
YES
NO
....
b) Police protection?
X
YES
NO
c) Schools?
X
YES
NO
d) Parks?
X
YES
NO
e) Other public facilities?
X
YES
NO
15. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
X
YES
NO
substantial physical deterioration ofthe
facility would occur or be accelerated?
Final I December 2017 9 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 10 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities that
X
YES
NO
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
16. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing measures
of effectiveness for the performance of the
circulation system, taking into account all
modes of transportation including mass
transit and non -motorized travel and
X
YES
NO
relevant components ofthe circulation
system, including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths,
and mass transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and
travel demand measures, or other
X
YES
NO
standards established by the county
congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels
X
YES
NO
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g, sharp curves or
X
YES
NO
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g, farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency
X
YES
NO
access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle,
or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
X
YES
NO
decrease the performance or safety of
such facilities?
Final I December 2017 10 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 11 Appendix A- Modified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.
a) 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
I5:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical Resources,
or in a local register of historical resources
X
YES
NO
as defined in Public Resources Code
section 5020.1(k), or
ii) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section
X
YES
NO
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code
Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to
a California Native American tribe.
18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional
X
YES
NO
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
X
YES
NO
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
X
YES
NO
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project from existing
X
YES
NO
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
Final I December 2017 11 Appendix A- Modified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Final I December 2017 12 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
New Impacts ofProposed
Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No
Less Than
Less Than
Potentially
Impacts
Subsequent or
Impact
Significant
Significant
Significant
Disclosed?
Supplemental EIR
Impact
After 1990
Impact
Required?
Mitigabon
e) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has
X
YES
NO
adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
X
YES
NO
project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
X
YES
NO
waste?
19. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE. Responses to the
following questions are discussed in
Chapter 3.
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality ofthe environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
X
YES
NO
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples ofthe major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
X
YES
NO
viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
X
YES
NO
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Note N/A- Not applicable
19. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
Final I December 2017 12 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
New Impacts of Proposed Premous FEISIEIR
Project Changes
No Less Than LessTban Poterdially Impacts Subsequent or
Impact Significant Significant Significant Disclosed? Supplemental EIR
Impact After 1990 Impact Required?
Mitigation
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation
measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions for the project.
Responses to this section are discussed further in Chapter 3.
Final I December 2017 13 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements -Project No. 17-6883
This page intentionally left blank.
Final I December 2017 14 Appendix A -Mod ified Initial Study Checklist