|
City Response to Comment Letter Lozeau Drury, dated October 10, 2022
<br />South Coast AQMD's jurisdiction. The threshold was set based on a 90 percent capture rate,
<br />which came from the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association's 2008 white paper,
<br />"CEQA and Climate Change."3 Based on the review of 711 CEQA projects, 90 percent of CEQA
<br />projects would not exceed 3,000 MTCO2e/yr.411 This threshold is used by many lead agencies in
<br />the South Coast AQMD region to identify GHG emissions impacts.
<br />In addition, the use of a modified 2035 threshold of 3.0 MTCO2e per service population per year
<br />(MTCO2e/SP/yr), is generally based on the statewide GHG reduction target established for year
<br />2020 under AB 32. It is derived from the 2020 statewide GHG reduction target for "land use only"
<br />GHG emissions sectors divided by the 2020 statewide employment for the land use sectors to
<br />derive a per capita GHG efficiency metric.' In the court ruling under Golden Door Properties, LLC
<br />v. County of San Diego / Sierra Club, LLC v. County of San Diego (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 892, the
<br />California Fourth District Court of Appeal generally ruled against use of efficiency -based
<br />thresholds that are based on a statewide inventory because they do not have enough of a nexus
<br />or connection to new development projects.
<br />Comment 8: This comment states that SWAPE prepared an updated air model using the project -
<br />specific information provided by the Exemption Checklist that determined the Project would emit
<br />approximately 14.6 MT CO2e/SP/year, which exceeds the SCAQMD 2035 efficiency target of 3.0
<br />MT CO2e/SP/year, indicating a potentially significant GHG impact not previously identified or
<br />addressed by the Exemption Checklist or GPU EIR, which precludes reliance on the CEQA
<br />Section 15183 exemption.
<br />Response 8: As detailed in Response 7, the 3,000 MTCO2e/yr threshold is used by many lead
<br />agencies in the SCAQMD region to identify GHG emissions impacts, and the California Fourth
<br />District Court of Appeal generally ruled against use of efficiency -based thresholds. Also, CEQA
<br />gives lead agencies the discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, how to
<br />assess potential GHG impacts. (See CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4.) The options specified include
<br />analyzing against applicable numerical thresholds, such as South Coast AQMD's. (League to
<br />Save Lake Tahoe Mountain Area Preservation v. County of Placer (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 63, 112
<br />[recognizing that using a numerical threshold from an air pollution control district was a
<br />permissible option that complied with CEQA].) Likewise, the CEQA Guidelines identify qualitative
<br />analyses as appropriate methods. Here, the Community Plan Exemption Checklist uses two
<br />methods to assess whether the Project's GHG emissions should be considered significant: (1)
<br />comparing against the SCAQMD's numerical threshold and (2) a qualitative analysis of the
<br />Project's consistency with SCAG Connect SoCal RTP/SCS, the City's GPU, and the Santa Ana
<br />3 California Air Pollution Control Officer's Association, "CEQA and Climate Change," white paper, January 2008,
<br />http://www,ca pcoa.org /w p-content/u p I oads/201 2/03/CAP COA-White-P a pe r. pdf
<br />a South Coast Air Quality Management District, "GHG Meeting 14 Main Presentation," Greenhouse Gases (GHG) CEQA
<br />Significance Threshold Working Group, November 19, 2009, http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default
<br />-source/ceqa/hand book/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-cega-significance-thresholds/yea r-2008-2009/ghg-meeting
<br />-1 4/ghg-meeting- 1 4-main-presentation.pdf?sfvrsn=2
<br />5 South Coast Air Quality Management District, "Agenda for Meeting 15," Greenhouse Gases (GHG) CEQA Significance
<br />Threshold Working Group, September 28, 2010, http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default
<br />-source/ceqa/hand book/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/yea r-2008-2009/ghg-meeting
<br />-15/ghg-meeting-15-main-presentation.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
<br />'South Coast Air Quality Management District, "Minutes for Meeting 15," GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder
<br />Working Group, September 28, 2010, http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/
<br />ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting-15/
<br />ghg-meeting-15-minutes.pdf?sfvrsn=2
<br />7 South Coast Air Quality Management District, "Minutes for Meeting 15," GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder
<br />Working Group, September 28, 2010, http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/
<br />ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting-15/
<br />ghg-meeting-15-minutes.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
<br />Exhibit 13
<br />Page Aof7
<br />
|