3 - The Bowery_PUBLIC COMMENT_RAMSEY

Home Browse Search

City of Santa Ana – The Bowery May 11, 2020 Page 15 of 28 1. The DEIR Defers Development of Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measures The DEIR’s HAZ-1 mitigation measure is impermissibly deferred because the proposed mitigation is to develop a Soil Management Plan in the future which “would detail hazardous materials excavation and disposal methods and requirements pursuant to [the applicable codes] that regulates the removal, transportation, and disposal of hazardous waste…” (DEIR at 5.7-22; DEIR at 5.7-30 (no specification for how contaminated soil will be removed); 5.9-25-26.) The DEIR fails to provide a specific plan or how compliance with any applicable code will sufficiently mitigate a known hazard on the site. The Project site “contains 900 cubic yards of contaminated soil that would require excavation and disposal.” (Id.) The mitigation measures for HAZ-2 are similarly deferred due to the same reliance on a Soil Management Plan to remove contaminants that has not been formulated. The DEIR needs to specify the removal plan and how code compliance will ensure safe removal of contaminants. 2. The DEIR Impermissibly Defers Development of Noise Mitigation Measures The Project is located near low-density residential housing and other nearby sensitive receptors which would be directly impacted by construction noise. The DEIR, in MM NOI-1 proposes a construction noise mitigation program that would include noise barriers, noise-reduction devices on construction equipment, distanced placement of noise-generating devices, and notice to nearby residents regarding noise at new construction phases. All of these proposed items are impermissibly deferred for specific formulation at a later date. (See DEIR at 4.9-14-15.) First, the noise barriers that are proposed “could consist of materials such as ¾-inch thick plywood.” There is no way to evaluate the sufficiency of the barrier with this description. The Project calls for, generally, “feasible noise-reduction devices” but does not specify what these devices will be. It calls for stationary noise sources to “be located as far away from noise-sensitive land uses as feasible” without detailing how that would or could be determined, or how placement will be decided for effectiveness. Second, MM NOI-2 calls for the applicant to retain a specialist to review the project plans and incorporate specific measures to mitigate noise that generally will reduce noise levels below specific levels, but fails to provide any specific of such a plan in the