The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-016 - The Bristol Street Widening ProjectROH — 04/07/15 RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -016 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 BETWEEN WARNER AVENUE AND SAINT ANDREW PLACE (PHASE IV) 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 (EIS 89 -01) 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. City Council has been asked to approve the commencement of Phase IV of the Project, widening Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place. Phase IV includes minor design modifications to the Project approved in EIS 89 -01. C. On April 7, 2015, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana considered the request for approval of the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Study/ Environmental Impact Report (EIS 89 -01). Section 2. The City Council previously approved and adopted Final Environmental Impact Study / Environmental Impact Report (EIS 89 -01). In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), an Addendum to EIS 89 -01 was prepared for Phase IV of the Bristol Street Widening Project. A true and correct copy of the Addendum is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. The City Council reviewed the information contained in the Addendum, which includes reference materials, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference, and as a result of its consideration and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the Addendum adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this 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. Section 3. The City Council hereby certifies and approves the Addendum to EIR 89 -01, and directs that any necessary Notice of Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the County of Orange in the matter required by Law. Resolution No. 2015 -016 Page 1 of 4 Section 4. These decisions are based upon the Request for Council Action dated April 7, 2015, and exhibits attached thereto; the public comments; and, the Final Environmental Impact Study / Environmental Impact Report (EIS 89 -01), all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. This decision rendered by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana is final and is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6. ADOPTED this 71h day of April, 2015. APPROV D AS TO FORM: Sonia,K.Apjv4ho, City Attorney M Attorney AYES: Councilmembers: Amezcua Benavides Martinez Pulido, Reyna, Sarmiento Tinaiero (7) NOES: Councilmembers: None (0) ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None (0) NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers: None (0) Resolution No. 2015 -016 Page 2 of '# CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2015 -016 to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on April 7, 2015. Date: t 7 1�r Clerk of the Council / City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2015 -016 Page 3 of 4 PLEASE SEE LASERFICHE RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -016 FOR EXHIBIT A Resolution No. 2015 -016 Page 4 of 4 August2014 CITY OF SANTA ANA Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Envlronmental Impact Report Addendum PRO✓ECTNUMEER: 133867 PROdECTCONTACTe Court Morgan EMA IL: court. morga n@P oloorang. com PHONE: 949-436 -3453 �$ POWER Y ENGINEERS Exhibit A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Environmental Impact Report Addendum PREPARED FOR: CITY OF SANTA ANA PREPARED BY. COURTMORGAN 714- 507 -2764 CO URT. MOR GAN @POWERENG. COM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Wldeninq Prolect Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. ..............................1 1.1 PURPOSE OF AN ADDENDUM .............................................................................. ............................... 2 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION ............................................................................................ ............................... 4 1.1.1 Existing Land Uses ........................................................................................................ ..............................4 1.3 PROJECT BACK GROUND ................................................................................... ............................... 10 1.3.1 Approved 1990 Final EM/ EIS ...................................................................................... .............................10 1.3.2 Adopted Transportation Improvement Program ........................................................... .............................10 1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................... ............................. 11 1.4.1 Bristol Street Widening Phase IV Project Area ........................................................... ............................... 11 1.4.2 Property Acquisition ..................................................................................................... .............................11 1.4.3 Changes as Compared to the Approved Project ............................................................ .............................15 1.4.4 Construction Timeframe ............................................................................................... .............................16 1.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS .................................................................................. ............................. 16 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECK LIST ................................................................... .............................19 2.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. ............................... 19 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .......................................................... .............................21 3.1 AESTHETICS ........................................................................................................ .............................21 3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................ ............................... 22 3.3 AIR QUALITY .................................................................................................... ............................... 23 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................................................. ............................... 32 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES .................................................................................... ............................... 33 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ....................................................................................... ............................... 34 3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ......................................................................... ............................... 36 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ........................................................ ............................... 37 3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ................................................................ ............................... 39 3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING ............................................................................... ............................... 43 3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................ ............................. 43 3.12 NOISE .................................................................................................................. .............................44 3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING ............................................................................. ............................... 49 3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES ............................................................................................. ............................... 50 3.15 RECREATION .................................................................................................... ............................... 51 3.16 TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC ............................................................................. ............................... 51 3.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ................................................................... ............................... 53 3.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ....................................................... ............................... 54 ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU i ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 4.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... .............................56 FIGURES FIGURE 1 REGIONAL LOCATION ..................................................................................... ............................... 7 FIGURE 2 PROJECT LOCATION ........................................................................................ ............................... 8 FIGURE 3 EXISTING LAND USES FROM 1990 FINAL EIS/ EIR ......................................... ............................... 9 FIGURE 4 PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS ............................................................................ ............................... 14 FIGURE 5 PROPOSED PROJECT LAYOUT ....................................................................... ............................... 17 FIGURE 6 PROPOSED LANE GEOMETRICS - 1990 FINAL EIS/EIR ................................ ............................... 18 FIGURE 7A NOISE MONITORING AND MODELING LOCATIONS ................................... ............................... 46 FIGURE 7B NOISE MONITORING AND MODELING LOCATIONS ................................... ............................... 47 TABLES TABLE 1 EXISTING LAND USES ...................................................................................... ..............................4 TABLE 2 PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS ............................................................................ ............................... 12 TABLE 3 PROJECT RELATED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS ........................................... ............................... 25 TABLE 4 YEAR 2015 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS ..... ............................... 27 TABLE 5 YEAR 2035 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS ..... ............................... 28 TABLE LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS ANALYSIS FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES .............. 30 TABLE 7 CO HOTSPOT ANALYSIS (PPM) ..................................................................... ............................... 31 TABLE 8 LOCAL SCHOOLS WITHIN THE PHASE IV PROJECT AREA ............................. ............................... 38 APPENDIX A ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ii ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 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 hnpact Statement / Environmental Impact Report (FEIS /EIR) approved in 1990 (FHWA -CA- EIS- 89 -01- F; SCH No. 87071509). This Addendum focuses on the segment of Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV, or Project) and is limited to the proposed improvements to this segment. This Addendum provides an assessment of potential environmental impacts associated with minor design modifications and the issue of climate change which was not addressed in the previously prepared and certified FEIS /EIR. Design modifications to the Project, since approval of the 1990 FEIS /EIR, that are addressed in this Addendum include the following: • The proposed Project increases the total right -of -way width from 120 feet to 128 feet. The proposed Project right- of-way cross- section would maintain a curb -to -curb width of 100 feet, would accommodate a 7 -foot wide bike lane on each side of the roadway, and would not affect the number or width of vehicular travel lanes as compared to the right -of -way cross - section addressed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. However, the proposed Project right -of -way cross section, as compared to the right- of-way cross section addressed in the 1990 FEIS /EIR, would reduce the width of the sidewalks from 10 to 8 feet and also accommodate a 6 -foot wide parkway on each side of Bristol Street to separate pedestrian and vehicular travel; a parkway was not included as part of the roadway cross section addressed in the 1990 FEIS /EIR. Acquisition of property resulting from the proposed Project right - of -way is accounted for in this analysis. • The centerline alignment has been shifted to the west starting at St. Gertrude instead of starting at Glenwood Place with the addition of 4 -feat to the original 20 -foot shift. The street centerline then shifted back 4 -feet to the east at St. Andrew in order to match the existing centerline north of St. Andrew. By shifting the centerline at St. Gertrude, the Phase IV Project saved eight parcels from full take by reducing these parcels to partial acquisitions. • A bus turnout would be located at the Warner Avenue. • Change right -of -way requirement from full take to partial take of the following single - family residential parcels: 015- 215 -10 (150 square feet), 015- 215 -11 (50 square feet), 015- 214 -10 (50 square feet), 015- 234 -10 (50 square feet), 015- 233 -11 (50 square feet), 015- 233 -10 (50 square Feet), 015- 232 -11 (50 square feet), and (015- 232 -10 (50 square feet). • Change right -of -way requirement from full take to partial take of Parcel 408- 336 -17 (3,466 square feet). • Land use for the current Project has been changed compared to the 1990 FEIS. The following parcels have been changed from Park to Park with Commercial Option: 015- 194 -38 and 015 -194- 39. • Preceding project phase inclusive of the following parcel which is no longer included in the Phase IV Project right -of -way requirements: 015- 194 -40. It should be noted that the 1990 FEIS and 2013 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Reevaluation (URS Corporation) provided comprehensive noise barriers at all easterly parcel boundaries currently fronting the east side of Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place and comprehensive noise barriers at all westerly parcel boundaries currently fronting the west side of Bristol Street between ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) West Saint Gertrude Place and Saint Andrew Place. Using the California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) May 2011 Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, the following noise barriers (NB) were determined to be reasonable: NB -4, NB -5, NB -6, NB -7, NB -8, NB -9, NB -10, and NB -11. These noise barriers are generally equivalent to the recommended noise barriers shown in the 1990 FEIS and 2013 Reevaluation. However, barriers NB -6, NB -7, NB -8, and NB -9 would need to be shifted to the west of the receivers (parcels) that are no longer being acquired. The modifications and other refinements to the project would not create any additional impacts than what was identified in the 2013 NEPA Reevaluation; thus, there would be no changes or additions to the avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures. Furthermore, as climate change is a relatively new area of discussion, the topic was not discussed in the Air Quality section of the previously approved FEIS /EIR. As such, this Addendum analyzes the effects of climate change associated with the construction and operation of the Project. This Addendum to the previously certified 1990 Final EIS /EIR 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 EIR under the requirements of CEQA or CEQA Guidelines (refer to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15164 and 15167). 1.1 Purpose of an Addendum Under CEQA, when an EIR has been certified for a project, no Subsequent FIR may be required for that project unless the lead agency determines, based upon substantial evidence, that one or more specified circumstances has occurred. Only if one or more of the following circumstances arises is a Subsequent FIR required: 1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revision of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revision of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following: A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a]) A Supplement to an FIR (or Supplemental EIR), which is narrower in scope than a Subsequent EIR, may be prepared if any of the above criteria apply, but "[o]nly 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]). In the absence of the need to prepare either a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR, an Addendum may be prepared. Section 15164 states: ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) (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 of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent FIR have occurred. (b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. (c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration. (d) The decision making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. (e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15164) This Addendum to the previously certified Final EIS/EIR for the Approved Project has been prepared because the evaluation of the proposed modifications does not result in any of the circumstances requiring a Subsequent or Supplemental EIS/EIR. As shown in this Addendum, although the proposed modifications would result in development that differs from that in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR, they do not trigger the need for preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR under the criteria listed in Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a). Sections 2 and 3 of this Addendum demonstrate that no substantial changes are proposed in the approved project or have occurred in the area of the Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project located between Warner Avenue and St. Andrew Place that will require major revisions to the previously certified 1990 Final EIS /EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Specifically, the proposed modifications do not result in new or substantially greater significant impacts because the scale and nature of the development proposed are sufficiently similar to that analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR that the impacts of the proposed modifications are within the levels and types of environmental impacts disclosed in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Additionally, no substantial changes in circumstances under Section 15162(a)(2) have occurred since the certification of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR for the approved project that would implicate 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 Final EIS /EIR preparation, has been revealed that shows new or substantially greater significant impacts will result (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3)). In addition, there are no new or different Mitigation Measures or Alternatives that would substantially reduce one or more significant impacts of the approved project but that are not adopted. The proposed modifications do not identify or require adoption of any further Mitigation Measures or Alternatives beyond those provided in the certified 1990 Final EIS/EIR for the approved project, since additional Mitigation Measures are either not necessary or not feasible, and the Alternatives analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR represent a reasonable range as requested by CEQA (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3)). The Addendum relies on the certified 1990 Final EIS/EIR and the related administrative record, in addition to the additional documentation included to support the Addendum, including the appendices. The Addendum is to be included or attached to the 1990 Final EIS/EIR 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 ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Council will consider and adopt or reject this Addendum at a public meeting prior to the approval of the proposed Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project (refer to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(4)). 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 EIR (refer to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(e)). 1.2 Project Location The project site is located on a segment of Bristol Street between Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place in the City of Santa Ana. The City of Santa Ana, located within the County of Orange, is surrounded by the Cities of Tustin, Orange, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, and Garden Grove. The proposed project site is located approximately 1.5 miles north of the San Diego Freeway (I -405) and approximately three miles south of State Route 22 (SR -22). Refer to Figure 1 and Figure 2 for the regional map and project location map with proposed roadway alignment and widening. 1.1.1 Existing Land Uses The project area and surrounding vicinity is located within a fully urbanized area of the City. The existing land uses along the project corridor consist of commercial and single - family residential developments. There are no outdoor activities associated with the commercial developments in the project area. The existing single - family residences consist of single -story homes of varying sizes, and include outdoor areas of frequent human use (i.e., rear and side yards). According to the current City of Santa Ana General Plan, land use designation for the affected parcels fronting Bristol Street within the vicinity of the Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project area and existing land uses are summarized in the Table 1 Existing Land Uses. The majority of surrounding areas beyond the project site are similar to the development typology along Bristol Street Widening Phase IV which includes single family residences, multi - family residences and various commercial and retail facilities. Figure 3 (Existing Land Uses from the 1990 Final EIS/EIR]), illustrates the existing land uses identified for Bristol Street Widening Phase IV as part of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. It should be noted that while the Phase IV project area stretches along Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place, Bristol Street at Edinger Avenue is also included as part of the project study area however, Bristol Street from Saint Andrew to Edinger has already been widened and is not a part of Phase IV. The locations of the full or partial acquisitions are shown on Figure 4. TABLE 1 EXISTING LAND USES ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU APN ADDRESS GENERAL PLAN ZONING EXISTING LAND U5E DESIGNATION 015- 191 -11 1235 W Saint OS SP1 Single Family Residential Gertrude PI 015 - 194 -17 2101 S Bristol St OS SP1 Commercial (Mortgage Office) 015 - 194 -20 2115 S Bristol St OS SP1 Commercial (Lawnmower/ Equipment Repair 015 - 194 -21 2119 S Bristol St OS SP1 Parking 015 - 194 -22 2123 S Bristol St OS SP1 Commercial (Palm /Tarot Reading in Single Family Residential) 015 - 194 -23 2201 S Bristol St OS SP1 Single Family Residential 015 - 194 -24 2205 S Bristol St OS SP1 Single Family Residential ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 015-194-25 -,algmg n-gl MY 2209 S Bristol St Os SPI IMP Commercial (Dentist) 015-194-28 2223 S Bristol St PIC Spi Commercial (Real Estate Office) 015-194-29 2227 S Bristol St PIC Spi Commercial (Costume Rental) 015-194-36 2231 S Bristol St PIC Spi Commercial (Dentist) 015-194-38 2215 S Bristol St PIC Spi Commercial (Ambulance Services) 015-194-39 2219 S Bristol St PIC SPI Commercial (Ambulance Services) 015-194-41 2109 S Bristol St OS Spi Commercial (Dentist) 015-214-10 1241 Camden P1 OS Spi Single Family Residential 015-215-10 1241 Saint Anne P1 OS SPI Single Family Residential 015-215-11 1242 Camden PI Os Spi Single Family Residential 015-216-01 1242 Saint Anne PI OS SPI Single Family Residential 015-232-10 1242 W Saint AndrE i OS Spi Single Family Residential 015-232-11 1241 Carlton PI OS Spi Single Family Residential 015-233-10 1242 Carlton PI OS Spi Single Family Residential 015-233-11 1241 W Glenwood I OS SIDI Single Family Residential 015-234-10 1242 W Glenwood I OS SPI Single Family Residential 408-332-01 1302 W Saint AndrE pi OS SPI Single Family Residential 408-332-17 1305 W Carlton PI LR7 R2 Single Family Residential 408-332-18 1301 W Carlton PI OS SPI Single Family Residential 408-333-01 1302 W Carlton PI OS SPI Single Family Residential 408-333-02 1306 W Carlton PI LR7 R2 Single Family Residential 408-333-18 1301 W Glenwood I OS Spi Single Family Residential 408-334-01 2034 S Bristol St OS Spi Single Family Residential 408-334-17 1305 W Camden PI LR7 R2 Single Family Residential 408-334-18 1301 W Camden PI OS Spi Single Family Residential 408-335-01 1302 W Camden PI OS Spi Single Family Residential 408-335-02 1306 W Camden PI LR7 R2 Single Family Residential 408-335-17 1305 W Saint Anne LR7 R2 Single Family Residential 408-335-18 1301 W Saint Anne OS Spi Single Family Residential ANA 305-194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) rrr�' `L✓a�"} tl"k_ ai -.: -S e' i � --T° {i. ""�;� ;^ # C T$,'!�'1v,Nt$44. �F'�.. N'�i�'� P �� s of 408- 336 -01 1302 W Saint Anne OS SP1 Single Family Residential 408 - 336 -02 1306 W Saint Anne LR7 R2 Single Family Residential 408- 336 -17 2040 S Bristol St LR7 /OS R2 /SP1 Vacant 408 - 471 -01 2102 S Bristol St GC C2 /SP1 Commercial (Restaurant) 408- 471 -05 2222 S Bristol St GC C2 /SP1 Commercial (Strip Mall) 408- 471 -06 2240 S Bristol St GC C2 1SP1 Commercial (Florist) 408 - 471 -17 2130 S Bristol St GC C2 /SP1 Commercial (Shopping Plaza) Notes: General Plan Designations: GC = General Commercial, LR7 = Low Density Residential, OS = Open Space, PIC = Park with Commercial Zoning Designations: SP1= Bristol Street Corridor Specific Plan, R1= Single Family Residential, R2 = Two-Family Residential, C2 = General Commercial Parcel 015- 194 -40 located at 2235 S Bristol Stwas not included in this list as itwas acquired by the City of Santa Ana as partof a separate preceding project. AN 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) FIGURE 1 REGIONAL LOCATION ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ;w A �KERN'CU. — — ,� OREGON IDAHO d Lancaster 'h� 5 UTAH a r. NEVADA �F ��' d � �Imdele � ��Adelanto �� CAIIFORNIAk eel',f x� > " iARIZON kr orvill v... MAI Aur_eatccn�.'.`i�w` aKy S a�an PACIFIC OCEAN LEGEND * PROJECT LOCATION \ r 14; �ernN � ,t RIVE SIDE�CO .'Hem Isi�no Fi f!W \ ( 1Nemecula _^ s jf r r k f k s FIGURE 1 REGIONAL LOCATION BRISTOL STREET WIDENING PROJECT WARNERAVENUE TO ST. ANDREW PLACE (PHASE IV) N ® Miles 0 5 10 15 \ r 14; �ernN � ,t RIVE SIDE�CO .'Hem Isi�no Fi f!W \ ( 1Nemecula _^ s jf r r k f k s FIGURE 1 REGIONAL LOCATION BRISTOL STREET WIDENING PROJECT WARNERAVENUE TO ST. ANDREW PLACE (PHASE IV) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) FIGURE 2 PROJECT LOCATION ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU PC1Rk yitloaLy - �i Ail Wypllhls fit �1 I I� 'dl iv ciifri r. I K GP = 11 i ii. '.� iI i 55 wilw[PP6t i i •` r ( Ru}ImarSi l ... It �( mil jl 1RlrNiandSt l �t 3 i e'� 7 �� WWISlenaP, p i i I,. i II,t 6 f�l i.A }t�J J n tt `�� ¢° ) _ I` i Hev�Ny PI. " l if i ='t' im ( m, ¢II w� t ir if Ell if Il611 Si �� I i I, I Lt I 91ddwd I i L it !' s ll I i = vl WEld -f AVe h It ` q Il r y (` nl I L _ d ' n zfl i �AVWHU}( 9p�) `wTe - ili I 'o ��a is rl _tIr :w`li bar n �& k( no 5ffi I. flil, NP—mw _ dV st r GartVm e1lt' ` I it Hirvaril5t �� Foil li !n4 l l _ gJ II—W AneIUtfit P,I - if -. it _ -i! I s w _ 1 1 I U= _II L m { WHe1iVV li if i S y I, w.l mI ilk l �. i ECxnIF rot f I_ n �jc i �ti _ w If t 2 1 p L 1 3: Ii st WH6'fevoRWn}. il . to ifiPm)an I -_ , a t Y9 p r I t 1 e., .r AVc i ,n Ldllo 1 AbnA,c j ll NIh3 y tt _ i n 1 1 VC. i=Ave W Be! AV, _ R1 ( W 3 t'ltlpt * 6lvtl I _ .=pIf, Av2 - �qfu aR>�r4 _ _ Ks z cent R, itl Santa Ana " o� K04 ,. ", Costa Mesa I i r ,. °•i.. LEGEND FIGURE 2 PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT LOCATION N BRISTOL STREET WIDENING PROJECT WARNER AVENUE TO ST. ANDREW PLACE ® Feel (PHASE IV) 0 1,000 2,000 FOI IRCF ARCGI.S ONI INF. NATPF0 WORT D MAP ACOFRSFO Ni ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) FIGURE 3 EXISTING LAND USES FROM 1990 FINAL EIS /EIR ANA 305494 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU tJ Q wa W N aw M0 =m W Q W LU o 2 uj ww � (D �o¢ U M ww� 0 3AY pli V" U) N� wQ W �w VA V XpYOt a m UR NY. VAV Yip X103 r x >i t a h' oS- �F"Y,7S, Pik �.iii�aF .'�tlx. 5L5yy4�'�4'.�pSYtl� !: 1pplYlt AW1X3Mtlt' s,+c •lrTf�r'$� y ++' MINOMV -It � pF J � li Mp11tlVp zU ZO q6 Ll � � O � lv pO0MMi1t �j z g H yuLL N ,� oa W m u D r7 ? NV— O NWM Z Oz wy UO iXNY 'lt S� .J 'W'llll�ll� eNXY is ° L° •. z� w? �w tp tl1Yi0 'Lt ° >a }r � w I z wa Fo C yw 3AY Yt MYVM r N Um0 OK Nm ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 1.3 Project Background 1.3.1 Approved 1990 Final EIRIEIS The City of Santa Ana General Plan has designated Bristol Street as a Major Arterial Highway traveling in a north -south direction. As a result of significant growth and traffic congestion on Bristol Avenue, the City, 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 Caltrans for the widening of Bristol Street in 1990. The 1990 project entailed a 3.9 -mile segment of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue on the south to Memory Lane on the north. Due to significant costs associated with construction and availability of funding, the project was divided into several construction phases; Phase 1 from Warner Avenue north to First Street, Phase 2 consisting of the widening and reconstruction of the bridge which crosses Santiago Creels (northerly limits of the street widening project), and Phase 3 between First Street and Memory Lane. The 1990 Final EIS /EIR document (SCH No. 87071509) was approved on November 19, 1990. The 1990 Final EIS /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 Final EIS/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). 1.3.2 Adopted Transportation Improvement Program The Approved Project is included as project number ORA125 in the regional emissions analysis conducted by Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG) for the conforming 2013 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) adopted by SCAG on September 19, 2012 and approved by FHWA on December 14, 2012. As provided in the FTIP, the Approved Project description reads as follows: BRISTOL ST (WARNER TO MEMORY LANE) WIDEN FROM 4 TO 6 LANES (IMPV AT BRISTOL /WARNER (ADD ATIEBISB THRULNS; WB RT TRNLN) AND BRISTOL /FIRST (ADD NBISB THR U INS, SBLFTIRTITRNINS The Phase IV project is a component of the Approved Project. The Phase IV 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 state implementation plans (SIPS) for achieving the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). FHWA determined the RTIP to conform to the SIP. The Phase IV Project's open to the public year is consistent with (within the same regional emission analysis period as) the construction completion date identified in the FTIP and /or RTP. The FTIP gives priority to eligible Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) identified in the SIP and provides sufficient funds to provide for their implementation. FHWA determined the TIP to conform to the SIP on December 2010. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 10 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) The Phase IV Project is also included in the 2013 TIP adopted by SCAG on September 6, 2012 and approved by FHWA on December 14, 2012. 1.4 Project Description 1.4.1 Bristol Street Widening Phase IV Project Area Phase IV of the Bristol Street Widening Project involves the widening of Bristol Street (between Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place) from 4 lanes to 6 lanes with a 150- foot -wide right -of -way cross section including a 14 -foot wide raised landscaped median; three 12- foot -wide through travel lanes in each direction; a 7 -foot wide Class 1I bike lane on each side of the roadway; a 15 -foot wide parkway, and 10 -foot sidewalk with curb ramps for wheelchair access pursuant to American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) requirements on both sides of the roadway. As Bristol Street approaches the intersections between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place, and between Warner Avenue and Glenwood Place, the landscaped center median would taper to accommodate right -tarn pockets and left -turn lanes in each direction. The landscaped center median would then continue north of the Glenwood Place intersection to match the existing raised center median approximately 380 feet south of Edinger Avenue. The addition of the landscaped center median would improve safety by preventing left -tum access to /from Saint Gertrude Place, Saint Anne Place, Camden Place, and Carlton Place to the newly widened Bristol Street. (Note: the intersection of Bristol Street and Saint Andrew Place would be converted to a right -turn only intersection in both directions.) Additionally, cul -de -sacs would be included on the west side of Bristol Street at Saint Anne Place, Camden Place, and Carlton Place to improve safety by preventing access to /from these streets to the newly widened Bristol Street. The location of the Phase IV Project is shown in Figure 1 and in Figure 2. Street signs and utilities including electric power lines, telephone poles, and street lighting would be relocated to new locations within the project area along Bristol Street. Street furniture, including the benches and bus shelters, will be provided at bus stop locations. During the one -year construction (approximately mid -2016 to mid- 2017), one lane in each direction would remain open and existing driveway accesses along Bristol Street would be retained at all rimes. Maximum excavation depth would be three feet for roadway excavation and 10 feet for utility /drainage excavation. Construction equipment would be those consistent with other similar roadway widening projects and likely would include excavators, loaders, backhoes, dump trucks, graders, pavers and rollers, and other construction trucks. 1.4.2 Property Acquisition To accommodate the street widening proposed by the Bristol Street Widening project, a combination of full and partial acquisition of right of way is required from a total of 43 residential and commercial parcels fronting Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place (refer to Figure 4 [Property Acquisitions] for the locations of affected properties). Table 2 includes a listing of properties affected and the disposition of acquisition requirements. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) TABLE 2 PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 12 015 - 191 -11 - -- 1235 W. Saint Gertrude Place Single - Family Residential Full 6,493 015 - 194 -17 - -- 2101 S. Bristol Street Mortgage Full 5,389 015 - 194 -20 - -- 2115 S. Bristol Street Lawnmower/Equipment Repair Full 5,881 015 - 194 -21 - -- 2119 S. Bristol Street Parking Full 6,000 015 - 194 -22 - -- 2123 S Bristol Street Palm /Tarot Reading in Single- Family Residential Full 6,720 015 - 194 -23 - -- 2201 S. Bristol Street Single - Family Residential Full 6,720 015 - 194 -24 - -- 2205 S. Bristol Street Single - Family Residential Full 6,600 015 - 194 -25 - -- 2209S. Bristol Street Dental Office Full 5,880 015 - 194 -28 - -- 2223 S. Bristol Street Real Estate Office Full 6,120 015 - 194 -29 - -- 2227 S. Bristol Street Costume Rental Full 6,120 015 - 194 -36 - -- 2231 S. Bristol Street Dental Office Full 5,940 015 - 194 -38 - -- 2215 S. Bristol Street Ambulance Services Full 5,760 015 - 194 -39 - -- 2219 S. Bristol Street Ambulance Services Full 5,640 015 - 194 -41 - -- 2109 S. Bristol Street Dental Office Full 11,402 015 - 214 -10 RD 1241 Camden Place Single - Family Residential Partial 53 015 - 215 -10 RD 1241 Saint Anne Place Single - Family Residential Partial 209 015- 215 -11 RD 1242 Camden Place Single - Family Residential Partial 48 015 - 216 -01 - -- 1242 Saint Anne Place Single - Family Residential Full 6,556 015 - 232 -10 RD 1242 W. Saint Andrew Place Single - Family Residential Partial 50 015 - 232 -11 RD 1241 Carlton Place Single - Family Residential Partial 52 015 - 233 -10 RD 1242 Carlton Place Single - Family Residential Partial 46 015 - 233 -11 RD 1241 W. Glenwood Place Single - Family Residential Partial 51 015 - 234 -10 RD 1242 W. Glenwood Place Single - Family Residential Partial 50 408 - 332 -01 - -- 1302 W. Saint Andrew Place Single - Family Residential Full 8,262 408 - 332 -17 - -- 1305 W. Carlton Place Single- Family Residential Partial 450 408 - 332 -18 - -- 1301 W. Carlton Place Single- Family Residential Full 8,286 408 - 333 -01 - -- 1302 W. Carlton Place Single - Family Residential Full 8,286 408 - 333 -02 - -- 1306 W. Carlton Place Single - Family Residential Partial 450 ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 12 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 4 g ssYe 1�T4sLN U g 408- 333 -18 - -- 1301 W. Glenwood Place Single - Family Residential Full 8,262 408 - 334 -01 - -- 2034 S. Bristol Street Single - Family Residential Full 7,531 408 - 334 -17 - -- 1305 W. Camden Place Single - Family Residential Partial 150 408 - 334 -18 - -- 1301 W. Camden Place Single - Family Residential Full 7,012 408- 335 -01 - -- 1302 W. Camden Place Single - Family Residential Full 7,009 408- 335 -02 - -- 1306 W. Camden Place Single - Family Residential Partial 150 408- 335 -17 - -- 1305 W. Saint Anne Place Single - Family Residential Partial 150 408 - 335 -18 - -- 1301 W. Saint Anne Place Single - Family Residential Full 7,012 408- 336 -01 - -- 1302 W. Saint Anne Place Single - Family Residential Full 7,012 408- 336 -02 - -- 1306 W. Saint Anne Place Single - Family Residential Partial 150 408 - 336 -17 RD 2040 S. Bristol Street Vacant Partial 3,466 408 - 471 -01 - -- 2102 S. Bristol Street Restaurant Full 11,079 408 - 471 -05 - -- 2222 S. Bristol Street Strip Mall Partial 1,415 408 - 471 -06 - -- 2240 S. Bristol Street Florist Full 21,169 408 - 471 -17 - -- 2130 S. Bristol Street Shopping Plaza Partial 17,076 Source: POWER Engineers, 2014. NOTES RD: Change in parcel boundaries or parcel impact subsequent to the 1990 FEIS and 2013 Reevaluation. -- No Change. The acquisition of property, as described herein, 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. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 13 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) FIGURE 4 PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 14 w Fc 9' u• a R i p �� d "i�� .Fd ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Proiect Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 1.4.3 Changes as Compared to the Approved Project It should be noted that project phasing has been revised from the original three phases identified in thel990 Final EIS /EIR. Construction phasing of the entire project segment has been further subdivided as follows: • St. Andrew Place to McFadden Avenue (Constructed in 2002) • Elm Street to Memory Lane (Constructed in 2003) • Pine Street to 3`d Street (Constructed in 2009) • Phase I: McFadden Avenue to Pine Street (Constructed in 2011)' • Phase IL• 3`d Street to Civic Center Drive (Construction to be completed in 2014) • Phase IIIA: Civic Center Drive to Washington Avenue • Phase IIIB: Washington Avenue to 17 "' Street • Phase IV: Warner Avenue to St. Andrew Place • Phase V: 17`1i Street to Elm Street The proposed street widening design configuration for the current Phase IV segment differs from the original configuration of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR, as follows: • The proposed Project increases the total right -of -way width from 120 feet to 128 feet. The proposed Project right -of -way cross - section would maintain a curb -to -curb width of 100 feet, would accommodate a 7 -foot wide bike lane on each side of the roadway, and would not affect the number or width of vehicular travel lanes as compared to the right -of -way cross - section addressed in the 1990 FEIS /EIR. However, the proposed Project right -of -way cross section, as compared to the right - of -way cross section addressed in the 1990 FEIS /EIR, would reduce the width of the sidewalks from 10 to 8 feet and also accommodate a 6 -foot wide parkway on each side of Bristol Street to separate pedestrian and vehicular travel; a parkway was not included as part of the roadway cross section addressed in the 1990 FEIS /EIR. Acquisition of property resulting from the proposed Project right - of -way is accounted for in this analysis. • The centerline alignment has been shifted to the west starting at St. Gertrude instead of starting at Glenwood Place with the addition of 4 -feet to the original 20 -foot shift. The street centerline then shifted back 4 -feet to the east at St. Andrew in order to match the existing centerline north of St. Andrew. By shifting the centerline at St. Gertrude, the Phase IV Project saved eight parcels from full take by reducing these parcels to partial acquisitions. • A bus turnout would be located at the Warner Avenue. • Change right -of -way requirement from full take to partial take of the following single - family residential parcels: 015 - 215 -10 (150 square feet), 015- 215 -11 (50 square feet), 015- 214 -10 (50 square feet), 015- 234 -10 (50 square feet), 015- 233 -11 (50 square feet), 015- 233 -10 (50 square feet), 015- 232 -11 (50 square feet), and (015- 232 -10 (50 square feet). I 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 ANA 305494 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Change right -of -way requirement from full take to partial take of Parcel 408- 336 -17 (3,466 square feet).Land use for the current Project has been changed compared to the 1990 FEIS. The following parcels have been changed from Park to Park with Commercial Option: 015- 194 -38 and 015 -194- 39. • Preceding project phase inclusive of the following parcel which is no longer included in the Phase IV Project right -of -way requirements: 015- 194 -40. It should be noted that the 1990 FEIS and 2013 NEPA Reevaluation (URS Corporation) provided comprehensive noise barriers at all easterly parcel boundaries currently fronting the east side of Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place and comprehensive noise barriers at all westerly parcel boundaries currently fronting the west side of Bristol Street between West Saint Gertrude Place and Saint Andrew Place. Using the California Department of Transportation's (Caltrans) May 2011 Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, the following noise barriers were determined to be reasonable: NB -4, NB -5, NB -6, NB -7, NB -8, NB -9, NB -10, and NB -11. These noise barriers are generally equivalent to the recommended noise barriers shown in the 1990 FEIS and 2013 NEPA Reevaluation. However, barriers NB -6, NB -7, NB -8, and NB -9 would need to be shifted to the west of the receivers (parcels) that are no longer being acquired. The modifications and other refinements to the project would not create any additional impacts than what was identified in the 2013 NEPA Reevaluation; thus, there would be no changes or additions to the avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures. The proposed Phase IV Project lane configurations are shown in Figure 5, whereas the lane configurations from the original approved 1990 Final EIS/EIR are shown in Figure 6. An assessment of construction and Project related GHG emissions 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. Construction of the Project is anticipated to begin in mid -2016 and be completed within approximately one year (mid- 2017). 1.5 Discretionary Actions The Addendum document 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 Final EIS /EIR. The City Council will consider the information contained in the Addendum and the 1990 Final EIS/EIR in making a decision to approve or deny the proposed project. No discretionary actions with regards to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), or changes are proposed pursuant to NEPA. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 16 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) FIGURE 5 PROPOSED PROJECT LAYOUT ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU I v f.A1l n,i 6 k� v v.r e UYI i4W (1 Np. '� 9E C yr 7 V; k IF Y ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) FIGURE 6 PROPOSED LANE GEOMETRICS -1990 FINAL EIS /EIR ANA 305494 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 18 "ltEt V- N art" sites SOURCE: FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTIENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, PROPOSED WIDENING OF BRISTOL STREET FROM WHILSHIREAVENUE TO WARNER AVENUE IN THE CITY OF SANTAANA, WILLDAN ASSOCIATES. 1990, FIGURE PROPOSED LANE GEOMETRICS (1990 FEISIEIR) BRISTOL STREET WIDENING PROJECT WARNER AVENUE TO ST. ANDREW PLACE (PHASE IV) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2.1 Background Project Title: Bristol Street Widening Phase IV Project Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, M -36 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Contact Person and Phone Number: Kenny Nguyen, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer City of Santa Ana (714) 647 -5632 Project Location: Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place in the City of Santa Ana. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, M -36 Santa Ana, CA 92702 General Plan Designation: General Commercial (GC), Low Density Residential (LR -7), Open Space (OS), Park with Commercial (P /C) Zoning: Specific Plan (SP1), General Commercial (C -2), Single Family Residential (RI), Two Family Residential (R2) Description of Project: The City of Santa Ana is proposing to widen the Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place as part of the previously approved Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane Project, for which an EIS/EIR was certified in 1990. The Build Alternative involves the widening of Bristol Street (between Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place) from 4 lanes to 6 lanes with a 150 -foot wide right -of -way cross section including a 14 -foot wide raised landscaped median; 3 12 -foot wide through travel lanes in each direction; a 7 -foot wide Class II bike lane on each side of the roadway; a 15 -foot wide parkway, and 10 -foot sidewalk with curb ramps for wheelchair access pursuant to ADA requirements on both sides of the roadway. As Bristol Street approaches the intersections between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place, and between Warner Avenue and Glenwood Place, the landscaped center median would taper to accommodate right -turn pockets and left -turn lanes in each direction. The landscaped center median would then continue north of the Glenwood Place intersection to match the existing raised center median approximately 380 feet south of Edinger Avenue. The addition of the landscaped center median would improve safety by preventing left -turn access to /from Saint Gertrude Place, Saint Anne Place, Camden Place, and Carlton Place to the newly widened Bristol Street. (Note: the intersection of Bristol Street and Saint Andrew Place would be converted to a right -turn only intersection in both directions.) Additionally, cul-de-sacs would be included on the west side of Bristol Street at Saint Anne Place, Camden Place, and Carlton Place to improve safety by preventing access to /from these streets to the newly widened Bristol Street. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 19 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) The widening would require full and partial takes of several parcels fronting Bristol Street as detailed in Table 2 (Property Acquisitions). Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is located within a fully developed urban area within the City of Santa Ana. Areas surrounding the project site consist of various urban uses such as commercial and retail facilities, and single and multi - family residences. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing, or participation agreement): City of Santa Ana ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 20 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES This section describes the effects of the proposed modifications to the Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project compared to those identified in the previously approved 1990 Final EIS/EIR document, and to existing conditions and any changes in regulatory setting since the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /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 a Final EIS/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 is found in Appendix A. • Aesthetics • Agricultural and Forestry Resources • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Geology and Soils • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Hazards & Hazardous Materials • Hydrology/WaterQuality • Land Use • Mineral Resources • Noise • Population and Housing • Public Services • Recreation • Transportation /Traffic • Utilities /Service Systems • Mandatory Findings of Significance A summary of impacts of the previously approved project and the mitigation measures imposed is provided along an analysis of the potential impacts resulting from the proposed project and whether those impacts substantially exceeds those discussed in the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR. 3.1 Aesthetics This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections A, Landform Modification, G, Urban Landscaping, J, Light and Glare, and K, Aesthetic Considerations of the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The proposed project would not result in any significant modifications or changes from the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR. The Bristol Street Widening Phase IV intersections are located within a highly developed urban area of the City. No scenic vistas are located within the project area. No impact to scenic vistas would result from the proposed project. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? There are no state designated scenic highways within the project area. The project is located within a highly developed and urbanized area of the City. No scenic highways are located within close proximity, nor is the project area visible from any scenic highways. No impacts are anticipated in this regard. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 21 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) (c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? The proposed project involves a total of 43 parcels of which 35 would result in the full take and eight would result in partial take. Field observations indicated that the potentially affected properties (residential and non- residential) do not have unique characteristics related to their age or condition that would be difficult to replace, or possess attributes that are unique. The proposed project would result in a reduced number of acquired units in comparison to the 1990 Final EIS/EIR and would not result in substantial changes in visual character as analyzed in the previously approved 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Implementation of mitigation measures as included in the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR would ensure that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. (d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Light and glare are currently generated from existing vehicular uses within the Phase IV project area, commercial and retail businesses, signage, street lighting, and parking lot lighting. The proposed project does not involve the construction of any structures other than relocation of street lighting fixtures. Therefore, no new sources of light or glare are anticipated with implementation of the proposed project. The proposed project would not generate additional daytime or nighttime illumination beyond that currently experienced within the area. Implementation of the proposed project would not create more significant light and glare impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. 3.2 Agricultural Resources The previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR did not include evaluation for agricultural resources, as no agricultural resources are located within the area of analysis. (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 California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? The project site is located within a fully developed, urban area of the City of Santa Ana. No Prime, Unique, or Farmland or 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 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. (b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? The project site is located within a fully developed, urban area of the City of Santa Ana. The project area is designated as General Commercial, Park with Commercial, Open Space, and Low Density Residential by the City of Santa Ana General Plan with a combination of Specific Plan (SPI), General Commercial (C), Two Family Residential (R2), and Single Family Residential (RI) zoning designations. No agricultural uses exist on site or in the vicinity, and the project would not conflict with a Williamson Act contract. The proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 22 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. (c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning, of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(8)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(8))? The project site is located within a fully developed, urban area of the City of Santa Ana. No timberland or forest resources exist on site or in the vicinity. The project area is either designated as General Commercial, Park with Commercial, Open Space, or Low Density Residential by the City of Santa Ana General Plan with a combination of Specific Plan (SP1), General Commercial (C2), Two Family Residential (R2), and Single Family Residential (R1) zoning designations. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. (d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? The project site is located within a fully developed, urban area of the City of Santa Ana. No forest land is located on site or in the vicinity. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No additional new 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 - agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use The project site is fully developed with no agricultural uses within or in the vicinity. No impact would result from the proposed project. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. 3.3 Air Quality This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections H, Air Quality and V. Construction Impacts of the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project is a component of the Proposed Widening of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane, which was approved in 1990. The Bristol Street Widening Phase IV Project is included as project number ORA125 in the regional emissions analysis conducted by SCAG for the conforming 2013 FTIP adopted by SLAG on September 19, 2012 and approved by FHWA on December 14, 2012. As provided in the FTIP, the Approved Project description reads as follows: ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 23 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) BRISTOL ST (WARNER TO MEMORY LANE) WIDEN FROM 4 TO 6 LANES (IMPV AT BRISTOL /WARNER (ADD NBIEBISB TI3RU LAS, WB RT TRY LN) AND BRISTOL /FIRST (ADD NBISB THRULNS; SB LFTIR TITRN LNS The Phase IV 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 state implementation plans (SIPS) for achieving the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). FHWA determined the RTIP to conform to the SIP. The Phase IV Project's open to the public year is consistent with (within the same regional emission analysis period as) the construction completion date identified in the FTIP and/or RTP. The FTIP gives priority to eligible TCMs identified in the SIP and provides sufficient funds to provide for their implementation. FHWA determined the TIP to conform to the SIP on December 2010. The Phase IV Project is also included in the 2013 TIP adopted by SCAG on September 6, 2012 and approved by FHWA on December 14, 2012. The Proposed Widening of Bristol Street, from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane project has been included in the federal TIP since 1992. The federal TIP gives priority to eligible TCMs identified in the SIP and provides sufficient funds to provide for their implementation. FHWA determined the TIP to conform to the SIP on April 2, 2009. No significant impacts would occur. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Furthermore, the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is designated by the state and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as nonattaimnent for ozone (03 ), and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5 ). 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 exceedanee of the ambient air quality standards (AAQS). Short -term emissions generated during project - related construction activities would not exceed the SCAQMD regional emissions thresholds for any of the criteria pollutants and also would not substantially elevate localized concentrations of these pollutants. Consequently, the project would be consistent with the AQMP. Long -tern emissions generated by the project would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for regional emissions and would therefore also not contribute to an increase in frequency or severity of air quality violations. 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 and result in a reduction in air pollutant emissions. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. (b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Short -tern emissions were modeled for the construction phase of the proposed street widening project. Construction activities associated with the project would include demolition of pavement and buildings, fine grading, trenching, paving, and development of ancillary strictures. During construction activities, emissions from heavy equipment exhaust, delivery trucks, and fugitive dust would be generated for a short duration. To ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 24 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) accurately determine the significance of air quality impacts from construction activities, construction emissions are quantified and compared to the significance thresholds set by the SCAQMD. Project - specific data, such as construction timelines and dimensions of the project site, along with general operating guidelines, were used as inputs to the SCAQMD's California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Model (version 2011.1.1) to quantify construction emissions. As shown in Table 3, emissions calculated by this model were compared to the SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds. As shown in Table 3, emissions attributable to construction of the proposed project were found to be below the significance thresholds adopted by the SCAQMD for all the analyzed air pollutants. 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 impact. In addition, mitigation measures included in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR would further reduce construction- related air quality impacts. ii0:1 d; 14Wi% 94nW *H61d;11141 1[O]1111146 1619101069 Source: URS Corporation, January 2013. An assessment of regional emissions associated with the operations phase of the proposed project was also conducted which compared emissions with and without the proposed project. Air pollutant emissions generated by roadway vehicles are quantified based on emissions rates that vary based on vehicle speed. Because the Proposed Project would increase the roadway capacity along Bristol Street, traffic congestion would be alleviated and average vehicle speeds would increase along improved roadway segments. Table 4 shows the emissions that would occur with and without the proposed Project based on the average vehicle speeds. As shown in Table 4, air pollutant emissions would be less under the With Project Alternative as opposed to the No Project Alternative due to the lower emission rates associated with higher average vehicle speeds. The SCAQMD has established significance thresholds to determine whether the operations phase of projects would result in significant impacts to regional air quality. The proposed project would result in air pollutant emissions which are below these significance thresholds and would result in a beneficial impact in emissions due to improvements in operational phase efficiencies along project roadway segments for the 2015 project opening year. Emissions occurring during the 2035 design year were also quantified based on the LOS, average vehicle speed and emission rates that would occur with and without the proposed project. As shown in Table 5, air pollutant emissions occurring under the With Project Alternative would be less than under the No Project Alternative due to lower emission rates associated with higher average speeds. Consequently, the Proposed Project for the 2035 ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 25 VOC `- NOx : CO S02 PM10 I PM2.5 Demolition 8 64 43 <1 12 3 Trenching 4 33 19 <1 2 2 Grading 7 52 31 <1 5 4 Paving 3 15 11 <1 1 1 Maximum 8 64 43 <1 12 3 SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No Source: URS Corporation, January 2013. An assessment of regional emissions associated with the operations phase of the proposed project was also conducted which compared emissions with and without the proposed project. Air pollutant emissions generated by roadway vehicles are quantified based on emissions rates that vary based on vehicle speed. Because the Proposed Project would increase the roadway capacity along Bristol Street, traffic congestion would be alleviated and average vehicle speeds would increase along improved roadway segments. Table 4 shows the emissions that would occur with and without the proposed Project based on the average vehicle speeds. As shown in Table 4, air pollutant emissions would be less under the With Project Alternative as opposed to the No Project Alternative due to the lower emission rates associated with higher average vehicle speeds. The SCAQMD has established significance thresholds to determine whether the operations phase of projects would result in significant impacts to regional air quality. The proposed project would result in air pollutant emissions which are below these significance thresholds and would result in a beneficial impact in emissions due to improvements in operational phase efficiencies along project roadway segments for the 2015 project opening year. Emissions occurring during the 2035 design year were also quantified based on the LOS, average vehicle speed and emission rates that would occur with and without the proposed project. As shown in Table 5, air pollutant emissions occurring under the With Project Alternative would be less than under the No Project Alternative due to lower emission rates associated with higher average speeds. Consequently, the Proposed Project for the 2035 ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 25 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) project design year would likewise result in emissions which are below the SCAQMD's significance thresholds and would result in a beneficial impact relative to GHG emissions due to improvements in operational phase efficiencies along project roadway segments. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 26 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) TABLE 4 YEAR 2015 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS _ tl .. Year 2015 No Project Bristol Street Between Glen wooc 15 76 5 13 0 2 1 Place and Warner Avenue Bristol Street Between St Andrew 15 23 2 4 0 1 0 Place and Glenwood Place Bristol Street Between Edinger 15 56 4 9 0 1 1 Avenue and St Andrew Place Total 155 1 11 1 26 1 0 1 4 1 3 Year 2015 With Project Bristol Street Between Glenwood 32 54 2 10 0 1 1 Place and Warner Avenue Bristol Street Between St Andrew 32 16 1 3 0 0 0 Place and Glenwood Place Bristol Street Between Edinger Avenue and St Andrew Place 32 40 2 7 0 1 1 Total 110 5 20 0 2 2 Difference between No Project and With Project Emissions Bristol Street Between Glenwood -22 -3 -3 0 -1 -1 Place and Warner Avenue Bristol Street Between St Andrew 7 1 1 0 0 0 Place and Glenwood Place Bristol Street Between Edinger Avenue and St Andrew Place -16 -2 -2 0 -1 -1 Total -45 -6 -6 0 -2 -1 SCAQMD Significance 550 55 55 150 150 55 Thresholds Exceeds Thresholds No No No No No No Notes: mph = miles per hour Source. URS Corporation, January 2013, ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 27 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) TABLE 5 YEAR 2035 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS °�� "c'` ^�'iT'iS°FcYS'3<vnd . ?%' 3a.�+'r nv+u 5". ...�.'� w. N?.. - iv�v'•Y -. i `...n2x - 'ji` 4 +hmr t d4 1u.'%tva'..5 -. v 'w- m Year 2035 No Project Bristol Street Between Glenwood 13 41 3 7 <1 3 2 Place and Warner Avenue Bristol Street Between St Andrew 13 12 1 2 <1 1 1 Place and Glenwood Place Bristol Street Between Edinger 13 30 2 5 <1 2 1 Avenue and St Andrew Place Total 83 6 13 <1 5 4 Year 2035 With Project, Bristol Street Between Glenwood 25 32 2 5 <1 2 1 Place and Warner Avenue Bristol Street Between St Andrew 25 10 0 1 <1 0 0 Place and Glenwood Place Bristol Street Between Edinger 25 24 1 4 <1 1 1 Avenue and St Andrew Place Total 65 1 3 1 10 1 0 3 2 Difference between No Project and With Project Emissions Bristol Street Between Glenwood g 2 2 <1 1 1 Place and Warner Avenue Bristol Street Between St Andrew 3 0 1 <1 0 0 Place and Glenwood Place Bristol Street Between Edinger -7 -1 -1 <1 -1 -1 Avenue and St Andrew Place Total -18 -3 -4 <1 -2 -2 SCAQMD Significance 550 55 55 150 150 55 Thresholds Exceeds Thresholds No No No No No No Notes: mph = miles per hour Source: URS Corporation, January 2013, ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 28 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) (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 ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? The SCAB is designated by the EPA and the State as being nonattainment for 03 , PM10 , and PM2.5 . 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. 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 to add significantly to any cumulative impact. Furthermore, it should be noted that the proposed project would increase the capacity at three out of the four study intersections (Bristol Street at Edinger Avenue has already been widened) during both AM and PM peak hours. Increases in roadway capacity would result in improvement in the LOS along Bristol Street. The improvement in LOS would result in increases in average vehicle speed and reductions in the amount of delay vehicles experience at intersections thereby resulting in both lower emissions and lower emissions rates associated with higher vehicle speeds. 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 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. (d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial 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. Localized Construction Impacts Localized air pollutant emissions are evaluated relative to the exposure of local sensitive uses to air pollutant concentrations generated by the proposed Project. These are pollutant concentrations which can be directly correlated to the health -based ambient air quality standards. This differs from regional emissions which were discussed previously in that regional emissions are used to assess how much air pollution is generated within an air basin and does not have a direct correlation with health effects. Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) have been developed by the SCAQMD for NOx , CO, PM10, and PM2.5 . The LSTs determine whether project- related emissions would substantially contribute to or exceed the ambient air quality standards and expose sensitive receptors to excessive concentrations of air pollutants. The LSTs differ based on distance such that a greater allowance in air pollutant emissions is allowed for construction activities occurring further from a sensitive use and a lesser allowance in emissions is given for construction activities occurring closer to sensitive uses. Only short-teen emissions occurring at the project site for the Project's constriction phase were included to determine if sensitive receptors local to the project site would adversely affected. Emissions generated by construction activities disperse rapidly with distance from the construction site. Individual construction phases were compared against the SCAQMD's LST significance criteria. As shown in Table 6, project emissions would not exceed the LST screening level criteria for CO, NO2 , PM10 , or PM2.5 . Because emissions associated with this alternative would be less than the LST, onsite construction emissions would not be expected to exceed the federal or California AAQS at the nearest sensitive receptors. As such, no significant air quality impacts related to localized air pollutants would occur from the construction phase. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 29 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) TABLE 6 LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS ANALYSIS FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES Intersection Hot -Spots While the proposed Project would not result in any direct sources of localized emissions due to the roadway street lighting being powered by electricity, changes in LOS or traffic volumes due to the project may cause indirect sources of localized emissions. While emissions of motor vehicles have improved due to more stringent vehicle emissions standards and the use of cleaner burning fuels, they continue to be the primary source of local emissions within the study area. Localized areas where ambient concentrations exceed national and /or state standards for CO are known as hotspots. The SCAQMD defines typical sensitive receptors as residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long -term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to AAQS is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of CO called "hot spots." These pockets have the potential to exceed the state one -hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight -hour standard of 9.0 ppm. Note that the federal levels are based on one- and eight -hour standards of 35 and 9 ppm, respectively. Thus, an exceedance condition would occur based on the state standards before the federal standards. The following intersections were modeled for CO hotspots: • Bristol Street and Warner Avenue • Bristol Street and Glenwood Place • Bristol Street and St. Andrew Place • Bristol Street and W. Edinger Avenue As shown in Table 7, both the 1 -hour and 8 -hour CO concentrations at the intersections that were affected by the proposed project would be substantially below the California and federal ambient air quality standards for CO, potential CO impacts related to the project alternatives are below AAQS and would not result in a significant air quality impact from CO hotspots. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 30 LI UTA�fi(L f.ud) t)( �Rl1Tl PMFlSE NOx CO PM10 PM25 x r. r Demolition 61 40 4 3 Grading 52 30 5 4 Trenching 33 19 2 2 Paving 15 1 11 1 1 1 1 SCAQMD Threshold 183 1,253 13 7 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No Source: URS Corporation, January 2013. Intersection Hot -Spots While the proposed Project would not result in any direct sources of localized emissions due to the roadway street lighting being powered by electricity, changes in LOS or traffic volumes due to the project may cause indirect sources of localized emissions. While emissions of motor vehicles have improved due to more stringent vehicle emissions standards and the use of cleaner burning fuels, they continue to be the primary source of local emissions within the study area. Localized areas where ambient concentrations exceed national and /or state standards for CO are known as hotspots. The SCAQMD defines typical sensitive receptors as residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long -term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes. Because CO is produced in greatest quantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to AAQS is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of CO called "hot spots." These pockets have the potential to exceed the state one -hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight -hour standard of 9.0 ppm. Note that the federal levels are based on one- and eight -hour standards of 35 and 9 ppm, respectively. Thus, an exceedance condition would occur based on the state standards before the federal standards. The following intersections were modeled for CO hotspots: • Bristol Street and Warner Avenue • Bristol Street and Glenwood Place • Bristol Street and St. Andrew Place • Bristol Street and W. Edinger Avenue As shown in Table 7, both the 1 -hour and 8 -hour CO concentrations at the intersections that were affected by the proposed project would be substantially below the California and federal ambient air quality standards for CO, potential CO impacts related to the project alternatives are below AAQS and would not result in a significant air quality impact from CO hotspots. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 30 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) TABLE 7 CO HOTSPOT ANALYSIS (PPM) As discussed previously, the proposed project would not result in air pollutant concentrations that exceed the SCAQMD's Localized Significance Thresholds for construction activities. In addition, the operations phase of the project would not result in CO hotspots. As such, the constriction and operations phases of the project would not result in significant impacts to air quality which would expose sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. (e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 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 -tern, would cease upon project completion and are not anticipated to be significant. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 31 WE Bristol Street and Warner Avenue` Northeast Receptor 6.8 20 4.6 9.0 No No Southeast Receptor 6.9 20 4.7 9.0 No No Southwest Receptor 6.9 20 4.7 9.0 No No Northwest Receptor 6.9 20 4.7 9.0 No No Bristol Street and Glenwood Place Northeast Receptor 6.5 20 4.4 9.0 No No Southeast Receptor 6.5 20 4.4 9.0 No No Southwest Receptor 6.6 20 4.5 9.0 No No Northwest Receptor 6.6 20 4.5 9.0 No No Bristol Street and St. Andrew Place Northeast Receptor 6.4 20 4.3 9.0 No No Southeast Receptor 6.4 20 4.3 9.0 No No Southwest Receptor 6.5 20 4.4 9.0 No No Northwest Receptor 6.5 20 4.4 9.0 No No Bristol Street and St„Andrew Place Northeast Receptor 7.1 20 4.8 9.0 No No Southeast Receptor 7.1 20 4.8 9.0 No No Southwest Receptor 7.2 20 4.9 9.0 No No Northwest Receptor 7.1 20 4.8 9.0 No No Source: URS Corporation, January 2012. As discussed previously, the proposed project would not result in air pollutant concentrations that exceed the SCAQMD's Localized Significance Thresholds for construction activities. In addition, the operations phase of the project would not result in CO hotspots. As such, the constriction and operations phases of the project would not result in significant impacts to air quality which would expose sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. (e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 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 -tern, would cease upon project completion and are not anticipated to be significant. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No additional new mitigation measures are required. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 31 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 3.4 Biological Resources This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection E, Streambed Modification, of the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (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 regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The project site is located within a fully developed urban area within the City of Santa Ana. No special natural habitat exists 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 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Refer to response in 3.4 (a), above. No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities are identified in the project area or vicinity. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Refer to response in 3.4 (a), above. No federally protected wetlands are identified in the project area or vicinity. The proposed project is located within a fully developed urban area of the City. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? The proposed 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 none are located within the project area. The proposed project is located within a fully developed urban area of the City. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133967 YU 32 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project WarnerAve to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) preservation policy or ordinance? The proposed project may involve the removal of existing landscaping, including trees. Any removal or planting of trees is required to comply with the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code, Article VII, Regulation of the Planting, Maintenance, and Removal of Trees. Furthermore, the proposed project would not conflict with the City's tree ordinance. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed project site is not a part of any habitat conservation plan. The project site is developed with urban uses and no natural conservation plans are adopted for the area. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.5 Cultural Resources This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection T, Cultural Resources, of the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as de£med in § 15064.5? The proposed project would not involve changes that were not addressed in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Based on aerial photographs and a windshield survey, the structures do not appear to be of historical significance due to unique architecture and are not anticipated to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Land uses within the Phase IV project area affected parcels include single family residential, parking lots, strip malls, shopping plazas, and various office uses. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? 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. However, implementation of mitigation measures as included in the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR would reduce impacts to archaeological resources yet uncovered or undiscovered. The proposed project would not result in archaeological impacts greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ANA 305 -'194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 33 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) As shown in Chapter VI, Resources Element, of the County of Orange General Plan, the project site is not located in an area of paleontological sensitivity. Also, the proposed project would involve only shallow excavation. Furthermore, since the project area is already developed, the potential for discovering paleontological resources during construction is low. Soils occurring in the project area are mostly Quaternary Alluvium. 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 Final EIS /EIR would result from project implementation. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? The project site is located within a fully developed urban area of the City. No formal cemeteries are located within the project area or vicinity. However, 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 Public Resources Code 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 turn, 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 human remains impact greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.6 Geology and Soils This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections A, Landform Modification, B. Seismic Hazards, C. Erosion Impacts, and F. Water Quality, of the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) i Rupture of a known earthquake fault, iv Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the substantial evidence of a known fault? Re Publication 42. delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo State Geologist for the area or based on other er to Division of Mines and Geology Special The City of Santa Ana is not included in the Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. The project site is not underlain by an active fault and the closest fault, the Newport- Inglewood Fault, is approximately eight miles to the west. The proposed widening would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (a) ii Strong seismic ground shaking? The Newport - Inglewood Fault is the closest fault to the project site and is the most likely source of ground shaking impacts. The proposed project is an intersection widening project and would not expose people or structures to adverse ground shaking impact. The proposed widening would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 34 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (a) iii Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? The project site is not identified by the 1990 EIS /EIR as having a high liquefaction potential but is near areas classified as high to medium liquefaction potential. In addition, the project would be constructed to achieve the standards outlined in the California Building Code to reduce impacts in this regard. Consequently, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to potential liquefaction impact. The proposed widening would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (a) 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 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Exposure of barren rock and soil surfaces during construction would result in soil erosion. However, considering the slight gradient, anticipated erosion impact is minimal. Furthermore, the project would be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting regulation, including the development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction activities. The SWPPP requires construction contractors to implement best management practices (BMPs) to reduce sediment from impacting the stormwater system. The increased erosion impact due to the intersection widening would not be substantially greater than previously analyzed. (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 result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? The 1990 EIS /EIR indicated that there are no instances of midisturbed, natural soils. The project site is underlain by well- drained alluvial fan or flood plains and is not included in the areas of high subsidence or high liquefaction hazard (but located south of an area identified as high to medium subsidence for liquefaction). The project area is fully developed with urban uses within the City. The proposed project will be constructed in accordance with the standards of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The proposed project would not create greater impact than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 35 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) The proposed project would not include the construction of any structures other than relocation of existing utilities. 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 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? The proposed project would not generate any sewage or wastewater and would not require installation of any septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems. No impacts are anticipated in this regard. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection H, Air Quality, and V. Construction Impacts of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? The 1990 Final EIS /EIR did not evaluate global climate change or greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts. Construction activities would consume fuel and result in the generation of GHG emissions. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in the early 2015 and be complete later that year. 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 after completion of construction, GHG emissions would not be significant. Furthermore, the project proposes intersection widening of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place, therefore only carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emissions from mobile- sources are evaluated. Similar to the other criteria pollutants, the highest emissions would occur between 0 to 10 mph and 50 mph and above. Because the project would improve traffic flow within the Phase IV project area, the project would result in reduced CO2 emissions. Consequently, GHG emissions associated with the project would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? 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 to GHG. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 36 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections V, Construction Impacts, X, Hazardous Materials, of the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. (a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The proposed project would result in demolition of structures. Compliance with the standard protocol surveys and abating procedures would be required prior to any demolition activities that would potentially disturb existing building materials. Furthermore, specific requirements limiting asbestos emissions from building demolition activities are set forth in SCAQMD Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emission From Demolition /Renovation Activities). The existing structures to be demolished and roadway paintings and markers are also required to be surveyed for lead -based paint prior to demolition, in compliance with the applicable local, state, and federal regulations administered through the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health. Compliance with existing regulations would ensure that impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EISBIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required (b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Refer to response in 3.8 (a), above. Compliance with existing regulations and mitigation measures from the 1990 Final EISBIR would ensure that impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? There are two schools that lie within one - quarter mile of the project site. Table 8 provides a summary of schools within the Bristol Street Widening ,Phase IV project area. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 37 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) TABLE 8 LOCAL SCHOOLS WITHIN THE PHASE IV PROJECT AREA �. � { Sa=6 �I�L�Oi. "� � ��CSx4"'Cx;p��'� ��•- 3' K{j. �4 � V�' C�L"'IY�'r'L ✓# .5^ W'.2C' 3 "'3r't�C'Ti -`'H" Jose Andres Sepulveda 1801 S Poplar Street, Santa Ana, CA West of Bristol Street at Saint 0,11 miles Elementary School 92704 Andrew Place intersection 1202 West Edinger Avenue, Santa Ana, Northeast of Bristol Street at Saint Mater Del High School 0.25 miles CA 92707 Andrew Place intersection Hazardous materials can be classified into four basic categories: toxins, flammables, irritants, and explosives. Toxins include a broad range of industrial chemicals and agricultural pesticides that may cause serious illness or death to humans. Irritants can cause inflammation or destruction of living tissue with effects ranging from mild to severe, depending on the degree of exposure and material involved. Flammables pose the threat of combustion at low ignition temperatures and rapid burning characteristics. Explosives can produce rapid chemical reactions causing damage from blast and flash fire. Because of their widespread use, it was assumed that each type of hazardous material was transported through, used, or stored to some degree, within the project area. Storage and use of hazardous materials was, and still is, generally limited to the industrial area to the west although hazardous materials are used or stored along Bristol Street at businesses such as gas stations, auto service shops, metal polishing and plating operations, and medical clinics. Both Mater Dei High School and Jose Andres Sepulveda Elementary School were identified and evaluated for potential impact in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. It is not anticipated that the project would increase risk of upset beyond previous conditions. Therefore, health risks associated with project construction activities would be less than significant and impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? The proposed project site involves the widening of an existing intersection. The project area is developed with commercial and retail uses. Compliance with existing regulations and mitigation measures from the 1990 Final EIS /EIR would ensure that impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (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 the project result in a safety hazard 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, miles southeast of the project site. The proposed widening would not introduce any new risks or increase risks associated with the project. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 PU 38 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street 1Mdeninq Protect Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for 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. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The disruption of traffic and restricted access along Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place during construction would affect the mobility of emergency vehicles. However, provisions would be made for interim access and traffic control plans would be prepared prior to each step in the construction process. Advance warning and information signs would be used to reduce the confusion motorists may experience during the construction process. It is expected that Bristol Street would remain open during construction. Although the proposed project may interfere with an emergency evacuation plan, it would be short term during construction, and the mobility would improve once the project is completed. Compliance with mitigation measures from the 1990 Final EIS /EIR would ensure that impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The proposed project site is developed with various urban uses within the City. There are no wildlands in the project vicinity and no new significant impacts would result with project implementation. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections C, Erosion Impacts, D, Floodplain /Floodway Encroachment, and F, Water Quality of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? As part of Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, the EPA has established regulations under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) program to control direct stormwater discharges. The proposed project would be required to comply with the NPDES program for the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB). ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 39 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Construction Activities Grading and excavation and use of hazardous materials during construction would create potential sources of polluted discharge. The construction contractor is required to conform to the requirements of the Statewide NPDES Storm Water Permit. Pursuant to the CWA, in 2001, the State Water Quality Control Board (SWRCB) issued a statewide general NPDES Permit for stormwater discharges from construction sites ( NPDES No. CAS000002). Under this Statewide General Construction Activity permit, discharges of stormwater from construction sites with a disturbed area of one or more acres are required to either obtain individual NPDES permits for stormwater discharges or to be covered by the General Permit. In addition, best management practices (BMPs) specified in the Caltrans Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) are also applicable. The construction contractor is required to conform to the requirements of the General NPDES Permit for Construction Activities and any subsequent General Permit in effect at the time of project construction. As part of the statewide NPDES permit, the construction contractor would be required to implement BMPs into their construction operations to reduce potential water quality impacts to the maximum extent practicable through preparation of a SWPPP. The General Permit contains requirements that BMPs must meet, including: Erosion Control Erosion control, also called stabilization, is the protection of the soil surface so that soil particles do not become detached by water or wind; and trapping soil particles that do become detached and are moved by water or wind. Non - Stormwater Management Non- stormwater management is the reduction or avoidance of discharges other than stonnwater, such as from cleaning of vehicles and equipment, and spills of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes. Non- stormwater management includes requirements for the use and storage of hazardous substances so as to avoid spills and minimizes pollution by cleaning spills that do occur. The SWPPP contains BMPs chosen for a project based on the specific activities that would be conducted as part of that project, and the amounts of stormwater and non - stormwater runoff that are anticipated. The 1990 Final EIS /EIR included a mitigation measure to control stormwater runoff associated with construction activities. Impacts would be less than significant and would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Moreover, the project would comply with the updated NPDES requirements, as described above. Operational Phase Operation of the proposed intersection has the potential to degrade water quality as a result of vehicular travel, including increases in such pollutants as oil, gasoline, grease, lead, and dust. Discharge from the proposed project to stormwater facilities would consist of non -point sources. Stormwater quality is generally affected by the length of time since the last rainfall, rainfall intensity, urban uses of the area, and the quantity of transported sediments. Typical urban water quality pollutants usually result from motor vehicle operations, oil and grease residue. The majority of pollutant loads are usually washed away during the first flush of the storm occurring after the dry season period. Due to the nature of the proposed project, generally occurring within an existing developed area, project impacts are not considered adverse. Consequently, impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 40 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) (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 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 existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? The project site is already developed and is not a groundwater recharging area. The proposed Bristol Street Widening Phase IV 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. No mitigation measures are necessary. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? The project site is already developed and the existing drainage pattern would not be changed due to the implementation of Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project. The storm drain improvements would be limited to relocation and /or construction of catch basins as necessary. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite due to drainage alteration. No mitigation measures are necessary. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required (d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off -site? The project site is already developed and the existing drainage pattern would not be changed due to the Bristol Street Widening Phase IV. 'Be storm drain improvements would be limited to construction of properly designed curb and gutter as necessary. The proposed project would not result in substantial reduction in impervious ground surfaces. The proposed project would not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff to create on- or offsite flooding. Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? The project site is already developed and the existing drainage pattern would not be changed due to the Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project. The storm drain improvements would be limited to construction of catch basins as necessary. The proposed project would not result in substantial increase in impervious ground surfaces. The proposed project would not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff to create on- or offsite flooding. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 41 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? The project site is currently developed and the proposed project would not result in substantial changes to the volume or nature of the urban runoff. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. The proposed project would be required to adhere to water quality regulatory requirements, as described above. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? The proposed widening would not place any housing within a 100 -year flooding zone as mapped by the FIRM. No impact would result from the proposed project. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? The Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project would not place any structures within a 100 -year flood hazard zone. No impact would result from the proposed project. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? The proposed street widening does not involve development of any above -grade structures except for the relocation of utility poles. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant flooding risk any greater than what is already existing onsite. No impact would result from the proposed project. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? The project site is approximately 10 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean. The likelihood of tsunami impacting a site more than five miles inland is minimal. The project site and its vicinity are built out with urban uses and there is no unusual slope or geologic feature in the area. The potential for seiche, tsunami, or mudflow impacting the project site is less than significant. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 42 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.10 Land Use and Planning This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection A, Landfonn Modification, of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Physically divide an established community? The project area is developed with various urban uses and the proposed widening would not divide an established community. Although there would be partial and full takes, the project would not create a physical barrier to separate a community. The proposed project would not introduce any significant land use impacts than previously analyzed. No significant impact would result from the project implementation. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (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 plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The proposed project would not result in changes to the land use designation of the acquired parcels. The proposed project is in compliance with the existing designation and would not create a new conflict. No significant impact is anticipated. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? The project site is not a part of any habitat conservation plan. The project site is already fully developed and the proposed widening would not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community. No impact is anticipated. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.11 Mineral Resources This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection W, Consumption of Renewable and Non - Renewable Resources of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? The project site is currently developed and does not contain any areas for the extraction of mineral resources. The proposed project would not involve excavation that would likely identify previously ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 43 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) unidentified mineral resources. No impact to mineral resources would result from the proposed project. hnpacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The project site is currently developed and is not delineated as a mineral resources recovery site by the City of Santa Ana General Plan. Implementation of the proposed project would have no impact on the mineral resources and no mitigation measures are necessary. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.12 Noise This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection I, Noise, and V, Construction Impacts of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (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? The proposed project involves widening of Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place. The land uses in between Warner Avenue and St. Gertrude Place, and adjacent to the project, are commercial (Category C) on the west side of Bristol Street, and a mix of residential and commercial land uses on the east side of Bristol Street. The land uses on both sides of Bristol Street between St. Gertrude and St. Andrew Place are residential. Mater Dei High School is located along the east side of Bristol Street north of St. Andrew Place. Jose Andres Sepulveda Elementary School is west of Bristol Street in this same area. The future noise modeling results of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR indicated that future noise levels would be no more than one dBA higher with the project as compared to levels without project improvements (noise level changes of less than 3 dBA are normally inaudible to the human ear). The 1990 Final EIS /EIR (and 2013 NEPA Reevaluation) provided comprehensive noise barriers at all easterly parcel boundaries currently fronting the east side of Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place and comprehensive noise barriers at all westerly parcel boundaries currently fronting the west side of Bristol Street between West Saint Gertrude Place and Saint Andrew Place. The following noise barriers were determined to be reasonable: NB -4, NB -5, NB -6, NB -7, NB -8, NB -9, NB -10, and NB -11. These noise barriers are generally equivalent to the recommended noise barriers shown in the 1990 FEIS and 2013 Reevaluation. However, barriers NB -6, NB -7, NB -8, and NB -9 would need to be shifted to the west of the receivers (parcels) that are no longer being acquired in whole such that these barriers are now proposed at the westerly parcel boundaries that front the east side of Bristol Street between Saint Anne Place and Saint Andrew Place (refer to Figure 7a and Figure 7b). Furthermore, the reasonable noise barriers would be constructed at a height of 8 feet, as opposed to 6 feet as identified in the 1990 FEIS and 2013 NEPA Reevaluation. The modifications and other refinements to the project would not create any additional impacts than what was identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. With implementation of the mitigation measures from the 1990 Final EIS /EIR, noise impacts would be similar to that identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 44 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 W 45 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) FIGURE 7A NOISE MONITORING AND MODELING LOCATIONS ANA 305 -194 (PLR 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 46 GEERRTRUDE PLACE- RzI ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) FIGURE 7B NOISE MONITORING AND MODELING LOCATIONS ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 PU 47 IW 11A t K ` � idreas geda ntary,'h i ool - M 1h '1 Al d M 2aF M-2h f , u I< its r(b Mater Del High School ry r Al M-2h ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) (b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Refer to response in 3.12 (a.) above. Project construction will involve typical groundborne noise and vibration. However, the majority of construction activities will consist of standard procedures, and will be relatively limited for any particular area. Construction activities would comply with the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code, which limits construction noise to the least noise sensitive portions of the day. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR with implementation of mitigation measures as included in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Refer to response in 3.12 (a.) above. During construction of the proposed project, the noise associated with construction may intermittently dominate the noise environment in the immediate area of construction. Typical construction equipment for roadway construction is expected to generate noise levels ranging from 74 to 89 decibels (0) at a distance of 50 feet. However, 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-tern, temporary and cease upon completion of the proposed project. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR with implementation of mitigation measures, as identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Refer to responses 3.12 (c), above, for discussion regarding temporary noise impacts associated with construction. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (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 the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The project site is not located within an airport land use plan. The nearest airport is the John Wayne Airport approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the southernmost Phase IV project intersection. No impacts would occur. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 48 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Refer to response 3.12 (e.), above. The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.13 Population and Housing This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections L, Population, M, Housing Displacement, N, Business Displacement, O, Impacts on Neighborhood Character and Minority Groups, and R, Effect on Assessed Property Values, of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. No take of residential parcels is proposed as part of this project. (a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure? Bristol Street and Warner Avenue are currently heavily traveled roadways and the City of Santa Ana is fully built out. The proposed project is designed to accommodate the existing and future traffic volume and would not create significant numbers of new trips. The proposed widening would not result in additional impact. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed project's Build Alternative is anticipated to result in full or partial acquisitions of approximately 43 parcels along the project study area. The acquired parcels are defined as distinct locations where residential and non - residential displacement could occur along the project alignment. The project is anticipated to result in the acquisition of 27 single - family residential units. This compares to a total of 28 single - family residential units (6 partial and 22 full acquisitions) as identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Of the 27 residential units that would be displaced as part of the proposed Project, 14 parcels would be considered partial acquisitions and 13 parcels would be considered full acquisitions. Since comparable relocation properties appear to be available in the metropolitan Santa Ana area in sufficient quantity, the need for replacement housing would not be triggered due to project implementation. The number of displacees resulting from the Proposed project are anticipated to be less than identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR due to the reduction in number of full acquisition of single - family residential units. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed project requires the acquisition of 27 single - family units could possibly result in displacing approximately 82 residents (URS Corporation, November 2011). The construction of replacement housing elsewhere would not be necessary because comparable relocation properties appear to be available in the metropolitan Santa Ana area in sufficient quantity. The project involves the widening Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place in an urbanized, residential/commercial area of the City of Santa Ana. The required relocations would not disproportionately affect any specific group or groups of ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 49 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTREPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) individuals. Before any displacement occurs, residential and non - residential displacees will be presented with a list of comparable replacement properties that are available within the last six months for rent, lease, or purchase regardless of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, and would be consistent with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.14 Public Services This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections P, Impacts on Community Facilities, and V, Construction hnpacts of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Fire Protection? The proposed project is an intersection widening project and no increase in demand for fire protection services would occur with implementation of the proposed project. Furthermore, 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. hnpacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Police Protection? Refer to response for Section 3.14 (a), above. The proposed project would reduce congestion and traffic idling times, and therefore, increase mobility of emergency vehicles, including police vehicles. The proposed project would not result in the need or increase the demand for police services in the area. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) Schools? No schools would be impacted by the proposed project and no school services would be affected by the proposed project. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (d) Parks? The proposed project is a road widening project and no park site would be acquired as part of the project. No park services would be increased or impacted by the proposed project and no impact would result from the proposed project. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (e) Other public facilities? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 50 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) The proposed project is an intersection widening project and would not generate demands for public facilities. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.15 Recreation This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection P, Impact on Recreational Facilities, of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The proposed project is not a growth- inducing project and would not create demand for recreation services. Physical deterioration of recreational facilities would not result from the proposed intersection widening and no impact would result from the project implementation. No mitigation measures are required with regards to recreational resources. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed intersection widening would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities and no adverse physical impact would be generated. No mitigation measures are required. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.16 Transportation /Traffic This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections U, Impacts to Transportation Facilities, and V, Construction Impacts of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (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 relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit. The Bristol Street Widening Phase IV 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 Final EIS /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 by Mohle, Grover & Associates in 1983. It was also recommended in the Arterial Highway Element — Santa Ana Element — Santa Ana Transportation Corridor State II Alternative Analysis prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff Quade and Douglas, Inc., in 1983. The proposed widening is also in agreement with the recommendation found in the Intercity Liaison Committee — Five -Year Transportation Study Update to 1990 prepared by Basmaeiyan- Darnell, Inc., in ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 51 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 1985. Furthermore, the proposed project would result in an improvement to the Bristol Street at Warner Avenue, Glenwood Place, and Saint Andrew Place intersections. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? The proposed project would result in an improvement to Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place. Once the project has been implemented, all roadway segments would operate at LOS D or better. The proposed project would not cause the County congestion agency's LOS standards to be exceeded. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The closest airport to the site is John Wayne — Orange County Airport, located approximately 3.5 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 be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The proposed project would improve the traffic flow along Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place and would not create any sharp curves or other incompatible uses. The proposed project would not create any significant hazards beyond what was previously analyzed. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (e) Result in inadequate emergency access? The proposed project would improve traffic flow along Bristol Street in the long -term. However, during the construction phase, the disruption of traffic and restricted access along Bristol Street could temporarily affect the mobility of emergency vehicles. Provisions would be made for interim access, and traffic control plans would be prepared prior to construction. Additionally, advance warning and information signs would be used to reduce the confusion motorists may experience during the construction process. Bristol Street would remain open 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. The proposed project would not result in a more significant impact to emergency access than previously analyzed, and with the implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? The proposed project supports the use of public transportation and it would not conflict with any alternative transportation plan and would increase safety. The proposed project would not result in impacts greater than as described in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.17 Utilities and Service Systems This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections S, Effect on Utilities, and V, Construction Impacts of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. (a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? The proposed project would not generate any sewer demand and would not change the sewer quality. No impacts are anticipated in this regard. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The proposed road widening project would not generate the need for water and wastewater services from the City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency and the Orange County Sanitation District, respectively. The existing sewer and water lines beneath Bristol Street would not be relocated. The proposed project would not create any new significant environmental impact. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The project site is already fully developed and the proposed project would not change the runoff volume significantly. Instead, the proposed project would improve existing drainage flow by constructing properly designed curb and gutter along the edges of Bristol Street. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in any new significant environmental impact. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 53 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) (d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? The proposed project would not result in any increase in water consumption. Landscape improvements, if applicable, would not require any new or expanded water entitlements. The proposed project would not create any new significant environmental impact. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required (e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? The proposed roadway widening project would not generate any sewer demands. No new significant impact is anticipated. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? The proposed project would generate construction waste on a short -term basis. The City has two haulers, Waste Management and Ware Disposal, which provide recycling services for construction and demolition projects. Construction waste that cannot be recycled would be taken to available landfills. The predominant receiving landfill for the City is the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill at 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road in Irvine. The landfill, which is owned and operated by the Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department, opened in 1990 and is scheduled to operate until approximately 2022. The facility has 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 Final EIS/EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. (g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The proposed project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The proposed project would comply with the City'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 Final EIS /EIR. Mitigation Measures No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance Based on this Addendum, the Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project has not substantially changed in regard to the setting, design, impacts, and mitigation measures as described in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. New ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 54 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project WarnerAve to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 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, 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 animal community, 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 greater impacts as compared with the 1990 Final EIS /EIR 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. (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 viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Due to the relatively limited nature of the proposed project and in consideration of mitigation measures addressed in the 1990 Final EIS/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 minor, temporary impacts, which can be mitigated with implementation of measures included in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Furthermore, potential long- term impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels through implementation of required mitigation measures. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 55 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 4.0 REFERENCES Air Quality Conformity Analysis — Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV), URS Corporation. January 2013. City of Santa Ana General Plan, Adopted September 1982 (with updates and reformatting through January 2010). City of Santa Ana Website: www .ei.santa- ana.ca.us.Community Impact Assessment — Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV), URS Corporation. October 2010. Relocation Impact Statement — Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV), URS Corporation. November 2011. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Proposed Widening of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane, in the City of Santa Ana. Wildan Associates. 1990. Noise Study Report — Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place, URS Corporation. November 2012. Southern California Association of Governments, Orange County RTIP, Project Listing Report. 2008, www.seag.ca.gov. Traffic Impact Analysis — Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place, URS Corporation. October 2010. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 56 APPENDIX A MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU Modified Initial Study Checklist The following Modified Initial Study (MIS) 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 Supplemental EIS/EIR or an Addendum under Public Resources Code 21166 and Guideline Sections 15162, 15163, and 15164. For purposes of this study, references to "the proposal' in the left hand column questions refer to the proposed project changes. The first four columns to the right of the MIS 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 after 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 (Not Addressed). Finally, the last column indicates whether or not a Supplemental EIS /EIR is needed. A Supplemental EIS /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 documents. Discussion in support of the conclusions indicated on the checklist is provided in Chapter 3 ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133967 YU A MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133967 YU New Impacts of Project Changes -` PreviousFEIRandFEIS - ess an Significant ess an Significant otentia VV Significant pp uppp ement al EIR/EIS robs P Impact After Impact DiscloseG? Required? Mitigation 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect X YES NO on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and X N/A NO historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site X YES NO and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which X YES NO would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Z 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 X N/A NO Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act X NIA 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 Resources Code X N/A NO section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(8))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - X NIA NO forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing en vironm ant wh ich, due to their location or nature, could result X N/A NO in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133967 YU ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU New Impacts of Project Changes - Previous FOR and FEIS Impact P Less an Significant Less an Significant Potentially Significant DiscPosed? uppp emenl al EIRIEIS - Impact After Impact`. .Required? Mitigation 3. AIR QUALITY. - Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X YES NO implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or X YES NO contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an X YES NO applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to X YES NO substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of X YES NO people? 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, X YES NO or special- status species in local 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 regional plans, X YES NO 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 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited X YES NO lo, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU New Impacts of Project Changes Previous FOR and FEIS No Impact Less I han Significant Less I han Significant Potentially Significant Impacts Disclosed? Supplement at EIR/EIS Impact After Impact Required? Mitigation d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or X YES NO with 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 X YES NO resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or stale habitat conservation plan? 5, CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a X YES NO historical resource as defined In § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an X YES NO archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or X YES NO site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of X NA NO formal 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 X YES NO State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU - New Impacts of Project Changes Previous FOR and FEIS Impact Less an Significant an Significant otentia V Significant Disclosed? ulp ement at EIR/EIS Impact After Impact Required? Mitigation ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X YES NO iii) Seismic - related ground failure, X YES NO including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? X YES NO b) Result in substantial soil erosion X YES NO or the loss of topsoil? 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 result in on- X YES NO or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), X YES NO creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste X NA NO water disposal systems 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 X NO NO indirectly, that may have a significant Impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the X NO NO purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? 8. HAZARDS, Would the project involve: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through X YES NO the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ;. New Impacts of Project Changes .. Previous: FOR and FEIS. No Less I ran Significant Less I nan Significant Ppienual Significant Impacts Su lament al EIR EIS Impact Impact After Impact Disclosed? Required? - - .:Mitigation . b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and X YES NO accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or X NIA NO 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 Section 65962.5 X YES NO and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within X NIA NO two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would 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 X NIA NO result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted X YES NO emergency 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 wildlands are adjacent to X NIA NO urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER. QUALITY a) Violate any water quality X YES NO standards or waste discharge requirements? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU New Impacts of Project Changes Previous FEIR and FEIS No Impact P ess I Man Significant Less I Man Significant Potemiall y Significant Impacts Disclosed? Icposed? upppement `al EIWEIS Impact After Impact Required? Mitigation E) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local X YES NO groundwater table 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 of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a X YES NO manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or X YES NO substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on -or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water X YES NO drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade X YES NO water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or X YES NO Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood X YES NO hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding X YES NO as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU New Impacts of Project Changes - Previous FEIR and FEIS Less : an Significant Less an Significant Potentially Significant Supplement atEIRIEIS Impact Impact After Impact Discosed? Required? ' Mitigation j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or X N/A NO mudflow? 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established X N/A 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 plan, local X YES NO 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 X N/A NO community conservation plan? 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. - Wouldtheproject: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would X YES NO be of value to the region and the residents of the stale? b) Result in the loss of availability of alocally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local X YES NO 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 X YES NO general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X YES NO groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase In ambient noise levels in the project X YES NO vicinity above levels existing without the project? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 10 New Impacts of Project Changes Previous FOR and FEIS Impact Less an Significant Less an Significant Potentially Significant Disclosed? uppp ement EIR/EIS Impact After Impact Required? Required? Mitigation d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise X YES NO levels in the 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 X N/A NO use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project X N/A NO expose 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 X YES NO and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the X YES NO construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X YES NO construction of 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 ob'ecllves for any of the a) Fire protection? X YES NO b) Police protection? X YES NO c) Schools? X YES NO ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 10 Appendix A ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU New Impacts of Project Changes Previous FOR and FEIS No ess inan Significant Less I man Significant Potentially . Significant Impacts uppp ement al EIRIEIS Impact Impact 'After Impact: Disclosed? :Required.. .:Mitigation 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 X YES NO facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of X YES NO recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 16. TRANSPORTATIONIfRAFFIG. 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 X YES NO mass transit and non - motorized travel and relevant components of the 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 X YES NO measures, or other 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 X NO NO in traffic levels 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 dangerous intersections) X YES NO or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 12 New Impacts of Project Changes. Previous FOR and FEIS No. Impact P ess an Significant Less an Significant Potentially Significant Imacts Disclosed? upppement al EIR/EIS Jmpact After Impact Required? Mitigation e) Result in inadequate emergency X YES NO access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian X YES NO facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the 'ect a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable X YES NO Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or X YES NO expansion of existing facilities, 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 X YES NO existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, X YES NO or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the X YES NO project's projected demand In addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X YES NO accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related X YES NO to solid waste? ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 12 Appendix A ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU New Impacts of Project Changes Previous FOR and FEIS . No ess I : an Significant Less I ham Significant Potentiall SignificantOisclosed? impacts upppement— al EIRIEIS Impact Impact After Impact Required? Mitigation 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. - a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the 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 X YES NO eliminate a plant or animal community, 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? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a X YES N project are considerable when 0 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 effects which will X YES NO cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or Note: NIA = 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 slate 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. ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) USA (AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU