My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 27 - Appeal Application Nos. 2020-03 and 2020-04 - Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2021
>
01/19/2021 Regular
>
Item 27 - Appeal Application Nos. 2020-03 and 2020-04 - Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/10/2024 2:34:56 PM
Creation date
8/22/2023 9:23:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Clerk of the Council
Item #
27
Date
1/19/2021
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
694
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
applicable guidance are used. Therefore, since our screening -level HRA indicates a potentially significant <br />impact, the City should prepare a Project -specific EIR with an HRA which makes a reasonable effort to <br />connect the Project's air quality emissions and the potential health risks posed to nearby receptors. <br />4) Updated Analysis Indicates Potentially Significant GHG Impact <br />As previously stated, the Staff Report relies upon the 2018 DSEIR for project -level environmental review <br />pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15162 and 15168. Regarding the Approved Project's greenhouse <br />gas ("GHG") impact, the 2018 DSEIR states: <br />"[C]onsistency with the City's CAP is the most relevant approach for analyzing the project's <br />incremental contribution to the cumulative effect of GHG emissions because the City's CAP is <br />consistent with AB 32 and considered to be a qualifying plan through 2020 under State CEQA <br />Guidelines Section 15183.5" (p. 4-59). <br />Thus, the 2018 DSEIR utilized the City's Climate Action Plan ("CAP") to evaluate the Approved Project's <br />GHG impact and conclude that emissions would be less than significant. Based on this analysis, the <br />proposed Project's GHG emissions are presumed to be insignificant. However, the Project's reliance on <br />the 2018 DSEIR, as well as the subsequent less -than -significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for two <br />reasons. <br />First, according to CEQA Guidelines section 15162: <br />(a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no <br />subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the <br />basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: <br />(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is <br />undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration <br />due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in <br />the severity of previously identified significant effects" (emphasis added). <br />As you can see in the excerpt above, if substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances <br />under which the project is undertaken, a subsequent EIR should be prepared. Here, as previously stated, <br />the 2018 DSEIR relied upon the City's CAP. However, as stated in the 2018 DSEIR, the City's CAP is <br />consistent with AB 32 and only qualified up to 2020 (p. 4-69). Regarding the use of CAPs and GHG <br />reduction plans ("GGRPs") qualified up to 2020, AEP's Beyond Newhall and 2020: A Field Guide to New <br />CEQA Greenhouse Gas Thresholds and Climate Action Plan Targets for California states: <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.