Item 27 - Appeal Application Nos. 2020-03 and 2020-04 - Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development

Home Browse Search

Central Pointe Mixed -Use Development Project November 9, 2020 Page 6 of 14 SWAPE prepared its own screening -level HRA to estimate the emissions associated with the Project's construction and operation using Project -specific information provided in the Staff Report. See id., pp. 8-12. SWAPE found that the excess cancer risk for adults, children, and infants at a sensitive receptor located approximately 125 meters away over the course of the Project construction and operation are approximately 91, 820, and 430 in one million, respectively. Id., pp. 11-12. Moreover, the excess lifetime cancer risk over the course of the Project's operation of 30 years is approximately 1,300 in one million. Id., p. 12. These all exceed the SCAQMD threshold of 10 in one million, resulting in a potentially significant impact not previously addressed or identified by the MEMU EIR or the Staff Report. Id. SWAPE's analysis constitutes substantial evidence that the Project may have a significant health risk impact as a result of diesel particulate emissions, and a revised HRA must be prepared disclosing these impacts. B. Greenhouse Gas Impacts. The 2018 MEMU SEIR states that "the City's CAP is consistent with AB 32 and considered to be a qualifying plan through 2020 under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5," and the 2018 MEMU SEIR therefore utilized the City's Climate Action Plan ("CAP") to evaluate the Project's GHG impact and conclude that the emissions would be less than significant. See Metro East Mixed -Use Overlay District Expansion and Elan Development Projects Subsequent EIR, p. 4-59; see also Ex. A, p. 13. However, the City's reliance on the 2018 MEMU SEIR and the subsequent less -than -significant impact conclusion is incorrect for several reasons. See Ex. A, p. 13. First, as stated in the 2018 MEMU SEIR, the City's CAP is consistent with AB 32 and only qualified up to 2020. Id. projects that will become operational beyond 2020 should not tier from CAPs only qualified up to 2020, and since it is already November 2020 and the Project has yet to be approved, it will not be operational by 2020. Id., pp. 13-14. Thus, the City's CAP is now outdated and inapplicable to the Project, and should therefore not be relied upon to determine the significance of GHG impacts beyond 2020. Id., p. 14. Second, the Project's GHG emissions indicate a potentially significant GHG impact when applying the SCAQMD efficiency threshold of 3.0 MT CO2e/SP/year for the year 2035. Id. The CalEEMod output files modeled by SWAPE with Project -specific information disclose the Project's GHG emissions, which include approximately 1,553 MT Co2e/year of construction related emissions and 7,915 MT CO2e/year of annual operational emissions. Id. Additionally, the Staff Report indicates that the Project would generate a service population of 1,399 people. See October 26, 2020 Staff Report, p. 1-258. Dividing the Project's GHG emissions, as estimated by SWAPE, by a service population value of 1,399 people results in the Project emitting approximately 5.7 MT CO2e/SP/year. Ex. A, pp. 14-15. Compared to the SCAQMD efficiency target of 3.0 MT CO2e/SP/year, the Project would result in a significant GHG impact not previously identified or addressed by the MEMU EIR. SWAPE's analysis provides substantial evidence of a fair argument that the Project may have significant environmental effects and must therefore be analyzed in a project -level EIR.