Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout75A - PH BRISTOL ST MEMORY LN PROJECTREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 5, 2017 TITLE: APPROVED PUBLIC HEARING -ADDENDUM TO THE ❑ As Recommended FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ❑ As Amended STATEMENT / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT F] Ordinance on tri Reading E] Ordinance on Reading REPORT FOR BRISTOL STREET / MEMORY ElRe Implementing Resolution LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT ❑ Set Public Hearing For PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 17-6883) (STRATEGIC PLAN NO. 6, 1G) 1 CIT ANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION CONTINUED TO FILE NUMBER 1. Adopt a resolution approving an Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report pertaining to the Bristol Street/Memory Lane Intersection Improvement. 2. Authorize the City Manager to approve an exception to the standard setback requirement per Municipal Code Section 41-781, so that the City may accommodate street widening without requiring full property acquisitions. Bristol Street is a major north -south transportation facility which is designated as a major arterial highway in the City's Circulation Element of the General Plan. Improvement of the 3.9 -mile Bristol Street segment from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane has been a long-term priority that is being constructed in several phases. Improvements include widening the street from two to three lanes in each direction, raised landscape medians, bike lanes, and sidewalks. In 1990, the City Council authorized embarking on these proposed improvements with the approval of the Bristol Street Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR) (Exhibit 1). The current configuration at the Bristol Street/Memory Lane intersection is two southbound through lanes and a dedicated right -turn lane. The approved FEIS/EIR envisioned three southbound through lanes and a dedicated right -turn lane at this intersection. In order to accommodate the third through lane and bike lane, widening of the existing street right-of-way (ROW) is necessary. Consequently, a narrow strip will need to be acquired as partial takes on the west side of Bristol Street, north of the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane (Exhibit 2). No provision was made in the FEIS/EIR to analyze the impacts of this specific acquisition. These modifications are identified in the Addendum to the FEIS/EIR as an exhibit to the resolution in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The design modifications to the project segment include the following: 75A-1 Public Hearing - Addendum to the FEIR/FEIS Bristol Street/Memory Lane Intersection Improvement December 5, 2017 Page 2 • The ROW width would be increased from 100 feet to 111 feet. • The street section width would be increased from 84 feet to 95 feet. • The ROW acquisition does not result in building nor property modifications. A resolution approving the Addendum to the FEIS/EIR (Exhibit 3) is needed to allow expenditure of grant funding for ROW acquisition and construction of the project. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution in accordance with the CEQA requirements. According to Community Commercial (C1) and Specific Development 27 (SD27) zoning requirements of the three impacted properties, the current standard setback is 15 feet. If the recommended acquisitions take place, the setback for two of the properties will be less than standard at three pinch point locations (Exhibit 4); two created by roof overhang setbacks of 12 feet and 14 feet, and a third location where a small balcony shielded by landscaping and vegetation is setback 11 feet. In accordance with Municipal Code Section 41- 781, the City may acquire property for public improvements which may result in non-standard setbacks if approved by the City Manager in consultation with the City Council. Since these setback variances are minor and since project costs are reduced from minimized ROW acquisitions, staff requests authorization from the City Manager to approve the nonstandard landscape setback. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #6 - Community Facilities & Infrastructure, Objective #1 (establish and maintain a Community Investment Plan for all City assets), Strategy G (develop and implement the City's Capital Improvement Program in coordination with the Community Investment and Deferred Maintenance Plans for Bristol Street widening. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT In 1990, City Council approved the Bristol Street Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR No. 89-01). Due to several minor design modifications, an addendum to the FEIS/EIR has been prepared. Staff recommends City Council to adopt the resolution approving the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report in accordance with Section 15164(d) of the California Environmental Quality Act. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal im ct asso iated with this action. red Mousavipo Executive Director Public Works Agency FM/EWG/JG/KN/ML Exhibits: 1. http://santa-ana/pwa/documents/FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport.pdf 2. Location Map 3. Resolution Addendum to the FEIS/EIR 4. Setback Exhibit 75A-2 Exhibit 1 Can be found at: http•//santa-ana/pwa/documents/Fina[Environ mental I mpactReport. Pdf 75A-3 75A-4 4 (NTS) r W E I'I;'Tj W-11 11 PARK LN SANTA ANA ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL W IMPACT STATEMENT / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR BRISTOL STREET/MEMORY 'PWA ] CRY COUNCIL LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 4.. (PROJECT NO. 17-6883) PACS 1 OF 1 IStrateale Plan No. 6.1. G] 75A-5 75A-6 Jmf 11/15/17 RESOLUTION NO. 2017 -XXX 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 PERTAINING TO THE INTERSECTION OF BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE 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 No. 89-01 ("FEIS/EIR') 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. The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA') requires that if there are minortechnical changes or additions to a project, and no new or substantially more severe significant effects result, an addendum to an approved EIR must be prepared. C. The City Council has previously considered and approved various addenda to the FEIS/EI R, most recently in 2015 for design modifications to Phase IV of the Project, between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place. D. To address minor design modifications to the Project concerning the Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection, a further Addendum has been prepared, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A ("Addendum"). E. On December 5, 2017, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15164, the City Council considered for approval this Addendum to the FEIS/EIR. Section 2. The City Council previously approved and adopted the FEIS/EIR for the Project. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Addendum to the FEIS/EIR was prepared for the 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. The City Council hereby approves the Addendum to the FEIS/EIR, attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated as though fully set forth herein. EXHIBIT 3 Resoluflon No. 2017 -XXX Page 1 of 3 75A-7 jmf11115/17 Section 3. These decisions are based upon the Request for Council Action dated December 5, 2017, and exhibits attached thereto; the public comments; and the Final Environmental Impact Study / Environmental Impact Report No. 89-01, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 4. The City Council directs that any necessary Notice of Determination be prepared and filed with the Clerk of the County of Orange in the matter as required by law. Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution. ADOPTED this _ day of 2017. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney By: John M. Funk Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers Miguel A. Pulido Mayor 75A-8 Resolution No. 2017 -XXX Page 2 of 3 jmf 11/15/17 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, Maria D. Huizar, Clerk of the Council, do hereby certify the attached Resolution No. 2017- to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on 2017. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 75A-9 Resolution No. 2017 -XXX Page 3 of 3 "EXHIBIT A" DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements Project No. 17-6883 Lead Agency: CITY OF SANTA ANA PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, California 92702 Contact. Kenny Nguyen 714.647.5632 Prepared by: MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL 5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500 Santa Ana, California 92707 Contact: Ms. Kristen Bogue 949.472.3505 November 2017 JN 161391 75A-10 This document is designed for double -sided printing to conserve natural resources. 75A-11 Draft I November 2017 i Table of Contents 75A-12 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM w I _- P11 - Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 TABLE TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose of an Addendum.................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Project Location..................................................................................................................1-3 1.3 Project Background.............................................................................................................1-6 1.3.1 Approved 1990 Final EIR/EIS...............................................................................I-6 1.4 Project Description ..............................................................................................................1-8 1.4.1 Proposed Intersection Improvements..................................................................... 1-8 1.4.2 Proposed Property Acquisition..............................................................................1-8 1.4.3 Changes as Compared to the Approved Project...................................................1-10 1.4.4 Construction Timeframe......................................................................................1-10 1.5 Discretionary Actions........................................................................................................1-12 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST.........................................................................................2-1 2.1 Background.........................................................................................................................2-1 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES................................................................................3-1 3.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources...................................................................................3-3 3.3 Air Quality..........................................................................................................................3-4 3.4 Biological Resources...........................................................................................................3-7 3.5 Cultural Resources..............................................................................................................3-8 3.6 Geology and Soils...............................................................................................................3-9 3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions...............................................................................................3-12 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials.....................................................................................3-13 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ...........................................................................................3-17 3.10 Land Use and Planning.....................................................................................................3-19 3.11 Mineral Resources.............................................................................................................3-20 3.12 Noise.................................................................................................................................3-20 3.13 Population and Housing....................................................................................................3-22 3.14 Public Services..................................................................................................................3-23 3.15 Recreation.........................................................................................................................3-24 3.16 Transportation/Traffic.......................................................................................................3-25 3.17 Tribal Cultural Resources.................................................................................................3-27 3.18 Utilities and Service Systems............................................................................................3-28 3.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance.................................................................................3-30 4.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................4-1 APPENDICES: Appendix A Modified Initial Study Checklist Draft I November 2017 i Table of Contents 75A-12 ikENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM n t° Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit1 Regional Vicinity ...................................................................................................................1-4 Exhibit2 Site Vicinity ............................................................................................................................ 1-5 Exhibit 3 Existing Land Uses (1990 FEIS/EIR)....................................................................................1-7 Exhibit Proposed Lane Geometries.....................................................................................................1-9 Exhibit 5 Bristol Street/Memory Lane Intersection Configuration (1990 FEIS/EIR) .........................1-11 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Proposed Property Acquisition...............................................................................................1-8 Draft I November 2017 2 Table of Contents 75A-13 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS § Section AAQS ambient air quality standards AB Assembly Bill AM ante meridiem APN Assessor Parcel Number AQMP Air Quality Management Plant CI Community Commercial Caltrans California Department of Transportation CAP Climate Action Plan CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide CPRC California Public Resources Code CWA Clean Water Act DOC Department of Conservation EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency etc. etcetera FEIS/EIR Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report FHWA Federal Highway Administration FTI? Federal Transportation Improvement Program GC General Commercial GHG greenhouse gas I Interstate LOS Level of Service LR -7 Low Density Residential mph miles per hour NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards No. number NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Os ozone OCTD Orange County Transit District PM post meridiem PMio particulate matter less than less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter Draft I November 2017 3 Table of Contents 75A-14 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM I� Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 PM215 particulate matter less than less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter RI Single -Family Residential ROW right-of-way RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCH State Clearinghouse SD27 Specific Development SIPS state implementation plans SR State Route SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TCE Temporary Construction Easement TCMs Transportation Control Measures TPD tons per day UBC Uniform Building Code U.S. United States UST underground storage tank Draft 1 November 2017 4 Table of Contents 75A-15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 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 Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report No. 89-01 (FEIS/EIR) approved in 1990 (FHWA-CA-EIS-89-01-F; State Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 87071509). This Addendum focuses on the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane (the Project), situated in the northern segment of the Bristol Street Widening Project. This Addendum provides an assessment of potential environmental impacts associated with minor design modifications and the issues of climate change and tribal cultural resources which were not specifically addressed in the previously 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 original approved 1990 FEIS/EHL proposed the same intersection lane configuration as that proposed. As shown on Exhibits the 1990 FEIS/EIR considered a 117 -foot ROW width in order to accommodate the additional third through lane, specifically for the southbound travel lane. However, no specific take of adjoining properties was acknowledged although the existing ROW is only 100 feet. Thus, the Project changes clarify that in order to accommodate a third -through lane, the Project requires to widen the existing street right-of-way (ROW) width of 100 feet to 111 feet, with the street section width from 84 feet to 95 feet, and the partial acquisition of three properties. Although the proposed lane configuration was analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, necessary partial ROW acquisition to accommodate this configuration was not considered. Proposed ROW acquisition would be required on the west side of Bristol Street, north of the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane. Refer to Sectionl.4.2. Proposed Property Acquisition, for a detailed description and mapping of these new areas of acquisition. These Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) include 002-261-06, -29, and -30. Areas of proposed ROW acquisition consists of vacant land, ornamental landscaping, and areas of paved driveway; no modification/demolition of habitable structures would be required as part of these new partial acquisitions to accommodate the Project. The Project would also accommodate a bike lane and relocate the existing perimeter fencing along Bristol Street and may include an extension of the existing storm water pipeline system (located on the eastern side of Bristol Street) through a new lateral connection and new catch basin at the Project site. Additionally, the topics of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and tribal cultural resources were not specifically identified in the previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR as these topics were not a subject matter that required evaluation pursuant to CEQA at that time. As such, this Addendum analyzes the effects of GHG emissions associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project, as well as the Project's potential to affect tribal cultural resources. This Addendum to the previously certified 1990 FEIS/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 CEQA (refer to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163, respectively). 1.1 PURPOSE OF AN ADDENDUM Under CEQA, when an EIR has been certified for a project, no Subsequent EIR 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 EIR required, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162: Draft I November 2017 1-1 Introduction 75A-16 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 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 ofpreviously 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 ofpreviously identified significant effects; or 3. New information ofsubstantial 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 projectproponents 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 environ- ment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a]) A Supplement to an EIR (or Supplemental EIR), which is narrower in scope than a Subsequent EIR, may be prepared if any of the above criteria apply, but "only 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][21). In the absence of the need to prepare either a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR, an Addendum may be prepared. More specifically, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 states: (a) The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare all 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 EIR 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 ofa 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 -»taking 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 fundings on file project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. This Addendum to the previously certified FEIS/EIR for the approved Bristol Street Widening 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. Although the proposed modifications would result in development that differs from that in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, those modifications do not trigger the need for preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR under the criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163, respectively. Section 220 Environmental Checklist, and Section3.0 Environmental Consequences, of this Addendum demonstrate that no substantial changes would result from the proposed Project modifications nor have the existing conditions in the Draft I November 2017 1-2 Introduction 75A-17 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 Project vicinity substantially changes such that major revisions to the previously certified 1990 FEIS/EIR would be required. The Project would not result in a new significant environmental effect or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Specifically, the proposed modifications, as compared to the 1990 FEIS/EIP, do not result in new or substantially greater significant impacts because the scale and nature of the proposed modifications are sufficiently similar to that analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR such that the impacts of the proposed modifications are within the levels and types of environmental impacts disclosed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. In addition, no substantial changes in circumstances under Section 15162(a)(2) have occurred since the certification of the 1990 FEIS/EB2 for the approved Bristol Street Widening Project that would result in 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 FEIS/EIR preparation, has been revealed that shows new or substantially greater significant impacts would 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 Bristol Street Widening 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 FEIS/ED2 for the approved Bristol Street Widening Project, since additional mitigation measures are either not necessary or not feasible, and the alternatives analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR represent a reasonable range as required pursuant to CEQA (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][3]). This Addendum relies on the certified 1990 FEIS/EIR and the related administrative record, in addition to the additional documentation included to support the Addendum. The Addendum is to be included or attached to the 1990 FEIS/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 will provide a 30 -day public notice for Public Hearing, at which time the City Council will consider and adopt or reject this Addendum (refer to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164Ld]). 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 proposed Project includes the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane in the City of Santa Ana (City). The City, located within the County of Orange, is surrounded by the cities of Tustin, Orange, Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley, and Garden Grove. The Project site is located approximately 0.73 mile west of Interstate 5 (I-5) and approximately 0.25 mile south of State Route 22 (SR -22); refer to Exhibitl, Regional Vicinity, and Exhibit2 Site vicinity. The Project area and surrounding vicinity are located within an urbanized area of the City. Existing land uses near the Project site consist of multi- and single-family residential uses, commercial uses, and vacant land. These surrounding land uses are further described as follows: • North: Bristol Street continues north of the Project site. Commercial uses (a small strip -mall with neighborhood serving retail uses are located to the northwest and Floral Park Promenade is located to the northeast). These properties are designated by the General Plan as Low Density Residential (LR -7) and General Commercial (GC), respectively, and both properties are zoned by the Municipal Code as Community Commercial (Cl). Draft I November 2017 1-3 Introduction 75A-18 Vnot to scale INTERNATIONAL 07W/17 JN 161391 MA5 FC Project Site BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Regional Vicinity Exhibit 1 SAN BERNARDINO / COUNTY LOS ANGELES ' COUNTY Is Brea Habra WPERAL HM Yoder � ® Linda © r , YORBq LINpq SLVD. j J ouena Fullerton Park Anaheim `� Anaheim Hills 8 RIVERSIDE JCypress ® Villa \ Park COUNTY ,GTEW PVE. Orange Los \ ® dAVE. Alamitos Q g J , PORANGE `�,_, ' Gardee Garden Grove ® ° Tustin 8P` v �aM,q COUNTY 1 c m Santa ° ¢ Ana Oi I WING. AVE. Seal Beach WgRNFA AVE. (Q IrvInee\q Huntington Costa Lake ® Fares / Beach Mesa P Project Site0< G°5gppH � I Newport ® 9 Mission \., Beach Viejo 11 Laguna 1� Niguel Laguna Beach _ o , 1— 0 IA ' - 6e San Juan j Capistrano Is s Ia q 0/F - Dana /O Point O C� 'I San I Clemente 1� SAN DIEGO 4N I COUNTY �v Vnot to scale INTERNATIONAL 07W/17 JN 161391 MA5 FC Project Site BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Regional Vicinity Exhibit 1 i _ O f 'A o 3f1N3Atl 0110OMIS3M pie •- +� -,. r r ut' � r, ;,� r ell N p �\.` a.� �.' , � � -1 r 17 ■ /�' -. T ]131vr➢ilsT.+. ," yi ®' rz w rC �' -fJ1" as a�� '�•1 133HIS '101 ," Tr , 'tb,N b1 ISI'• F �i t IreK r n �G 1 s n. a'h.J , 2 1 y a �l4 F`r'.t" K * ue lel ff1 ti�'1','1 ♦ f ,_ it d dome A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 • East: Memory Lane continues east of the Project site. Commercial uses (Floral Park Promenade located to the east and northeast and a Shell gasoline service station located to the east and southeast) are present. These properties are all designated GC and zoned Cl. Further southeast of Shell, single-family residential uses (designated LR -7 and zoned Single -Family Residence [Rl]) are present. • South: Bristol Street continues south of the Project site. Commercial uses (the Shell gasoline service station located to the south and southeast and a strip -mall with neighborhood serving retail uses located to the south and southwest) are present. All of these properties are designated GC and zoned Cl. Further southeast of Shell, Casa de Santiago single-family residential uses (designated LR -7 and zoned RI) are present. • West: Memory Lane continues west of the Project site. Vacant land (designated GC and zoned Cl) is situated to the west of the Project site and further west is the Portofino Apartments (designated LR -7 and zoned Specific Development [SD271). Islander Apartments (designated LR -7 and zoned Cl) are situated to the west and northwest of the Project site. As shown on Exhibit3, Ezistinr Land Uses (1990 FEISIEIR), these land uses have not substantially changed since preparation of the 1990 FEIS/EIR. It is acknowledged that the 1990 FEIS/EIR did not include land uses north of Memory Lane in the applicable figures. In order to provide information on land uses north of Memory Lane, Exhibit 3 also identifies these current land uses. These current land uses have not substantially changed since the 1990 FEIS/EE2, as the 1990 FEIS/EIR considered the surrounding land uses to include a mix of commercial and residential development. 1.3 PROJECT BACKGROUND 1.3.1 APPROVED 1990 FINAL EIR/EIS The City of Santa Ana General Plan designates Bristol Street as a Major Arterial Highway traveling in a north -south direction. As a result of significant growth and traffic congestion on Bristol Street, the City of Santa Ana, 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 the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the widening of Bristol Street in 1990. The 1990 Bristol Street Widening Project entailed a 3.9 -mile segment of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane. The Project site is situated within the northern -most portion of Bristol Street, previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR as the segment from Seventeenth Street to Memory Lane. However, due to significant costs associated with construction and availability of funding, the Bristol Street Widening Project was divided into multiple segments and phases, compared to that analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR: • Phase I, from McFadden Avenue to Pine Street; • Phase IL from 3`d Street to Civic Center; • Phase HIA, from Civic Center to Washington Avenue; • Phase 11M, from Washington Avenue to 17'1 Street; and • Phase IV, from Warner Avenue to St. Andrew Place. The Bristol Street Widening segments operate independently; operation of one segment is not dependent on another. It is acknowledged that prior to dividing the Bristol Street Widening Project for funding purposes, construction of some sections was completed and was not included in the phasing described above, including the following: • St. Andrew Place to McFadden Avenue; • Elm Street to Memory Lane; and • Pine Street to 3r1 Street. The segment between 170 Street and Elm Street is not funded; therefore, no phasing has been identified. Draft I November 2017 1-6 Introduction 75A-21 1i3tl15 NIL4 133tl15 HIBI � OF 133tl15 Hlbl iie•+mus ss�x I RM 3 13i ONU s - ron Avm Noiuvw z a33ws Wi3 � totE b� fi :e o Wg 3rvtll cava HiMMW 3NV1 AMOW3W 75A-22 v JN Q Q O H H yZj Z � w C H O w w V W Q r W N m F 7 J 0 V0 N ¢ 2 u < �n V tD w a ¢ I � 3 W ¢ J u w z 9 o z w_ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 The 1990 FEIS/EIR (SCH No. 87071509) was approved on November 19, 1990. The 1990 FEIS/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 FEIS/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). 1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.4.1 PROPOSED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS The City proposes the widening of Bristol Street, just north of Memory Lane, to accommodate a third southbound through lane at the intersection; refer to Exhibit4, Proposed Lane Geometrics. This additional through lane would result in the relocation of the existing dedicated right -turn lane slightly west. The proposed widening would involve the partial acquisition of three parcels in order to accommodate the new total ROW widths (proposed to expand from 100 feet to 111 feet). The proposed intersection improvements would require relocation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, driveway approaches, and both public and private utilities (including the existing traffic signal). Existing perimeter fencing along Bristol Street would also be relocated and replaced in-kind with a similar aesthetic treatment. Due to the existing building setback requirements, the Project would require approval from the City Manager for landscape strip Exceptions for building setbacks per Municipal Code Section 41-781. The Project proposes a 12 -month construction period (anticipated to be completed by December 2019). At least one lane in each direction of travel would remain open and existing driveway access along Bristol Street and Memory Lane would be retained at all times. The maximum excavation depth would be two feet for roadway excavation, and approximately 10 feet or less for utility footings/excavation. Approximately 30 cubic yards of cut material is anticipated to be exported. Other improvements may include a new stormwater catch basin and a new lateral connection to the existing stormwater pipeline in Bristol Street. 1.4.2 PROPOSED PROPERTY ACQUISITION As listed in Tablet, Pronosed Property Acauisition, a total of three Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs) (002-261- 06, -29, and -30) would be partially acquired as a result of the proposed intersection improvements; refer to Exhibit 4. All proposed areas of acquisition include vacant portions of commercial and multi -family residential properties. These vacant areas consist of bare soils, paving/asphalt, or ornamental landscaping. The acquisitions 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. Table 1 Proposed Property Acquisition Draft I November 2017 1-8 Introduction 75A-23 Permanent Temporary Construction APN Address Existing Land Use Acquisition Type Acquisition Easement (square feet) (square feet) 002-261-06 2702 N. Bristol Street Vacant Commercial Partial and TCE 1,586 728 002-261-29 1313 W. Memory Lane Ornamental Landscaping and Driveway Partial and TCE 1,265 575 Associated with the Portofino Apartments 002-261-30 2724 N. Bristol Street Ornamental Landscaping and Driveway Partial and TCE 394 457 Associated with the Islander Apartments Notes: TCE=Tem craryConstrucdon Easement Draft I November 2017 1-8 Introduction 75A-23 I �I AME CO II i r ISI z, } ° J � �` r t • �' �`1 � X999}}} I �I AME CO II i r ISI z, } ° J � �` r 75A-24 rJ v a r W ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 1.4.3 CHANGES AS COMPARED TO THE APPROVED PROJECT It should be noted that Project phasing has been revised from the original phases identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. As discussed in Section 1.3.1, Approved 1990 Final EIRIEIS, construction phasing of the entire Bristol Street Widening Project has been further subdivided as follows: • SL 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 20111); • Phase II: 3`d Street to Civic Center Drive (Constructed in 2014); • Phase IIIA: Civic Center Drive to Washington Avenue; • Phase 1118: Washington Avenue to 170' Street (under construction); • Phase IV: Warner Avenue to St. Andrew Place; and • Phase V: 17'h Street to Elm Street. The proposed intersection improvements (proposed Project addressed herein) differs from the original configuration of the 1990 FEIS/EIR, as follows: As shown on Exhibit4 and Exhibit5, Bristol Street/Memory Lane Intersection Confleuration /1990 FEISIEIR , the original approved 1990 FEIS/EIR proposed the same intersection lane configuration as that proposed. As shown on Exhibit5, the 1990 FEIS/EIR considered a 117 -foot ROW width in order to accommodate the additional third through lane, specifically for the southbound travel lane. However, no specific take of adjoining properties was acknowledged although the existing ROW is only 100 feet. Thus, the Project changes clarify that in order to accommodate a third -through lane, the Project requires to widen the existing street ROW width of 100 feet to 111 feet, with the street section width from 84 feet to 95 feet, and the partial acquisition of three properties. Although the proposed lane configuration was analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, necessary partial ROW acquisition to accommodate this configuration was not considered. Proposed ROW acquisition would be required on the west side of Bristol Street, north of the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane. As depicted on Exhibit5, these Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) include 002-261-06, -29, and -30. Areas of proposed ROW acquisition consist of vacant land, omamental landscaping, and areas of paved driveway; no modification/demolition of habitable structures would be required as part of these new partial acquisitions to accommodate the Project. The Project would also accommodate a bike lane and relocate the existing perimeter fencing along Bristol Street and may include an extension of the existing storm water pipeline system (located on the eastern side of Bristol Street) through a new lateral connection and new catch basin at the Project site. An assessment of construction and Project -related GHG emissions and potential impacts to tribal cultural resources was also not addressed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, and as a result is addressed in this Addendum. fiPE. }CX0161.61r;itLf3III [a]L, III rIJ1I=1y;III d11:4 Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would occur following acquisition of the required parcels. The Project proposes a 12 -month construction period (anticipated to be completed by December 2019). However, it is acknowledged that the Project could be constructed in multiple phases, depending on funding. ' 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 Widening Project. Draft I November 2017 1-10 Introduction 75A-25 Source: Willdan Associates ill III Si' tt tr 1f t; w Z7 Vnot to scale INTERNATIONAL 10/17/17 M161391 MAS � 37 fl' I til n t Bristol street FAioi11171 BRISTOL STREET AND MEMORY LANE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Bristol Street/Memory Lane Intersection Confiouration 75A-26 Exhibit 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 1.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS Landscape strip Exceptions for building setbacks must be approved by the City Manager per Municipal Code Section 41-781, and this Addendum 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 FEIS/EIR. The City Council will consider the information contained in the Addendum and the 1990 FEIS/EIR in making a decision to approve or deny the proposed Project. Draft I November 2017 1-12 Introduction 75A-27 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2.1 BACKGROUND 1. Project Title: Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements Project (Project No. 17-6883) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-36 Santa Ana, CA 92702 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Kenny Nguyen, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer 714.647.5632 4. Project Location: The intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane in the City of Santa Ana. The Project site is located approximately 0.73 mile west of Interstate 5 (1-5) and approximately 0.25 mile south of State Route 22 (SR - 22). 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-36 Santa Ana, CA 92702 6. General Plan Designation: General Commercial (GC) and Low Density Residential (LR -7) 7. Zoning: Community Commercial (Cl) and Specific Development (SD27) 8. Description of the Project: The City proposes the widening of Bristol Street, just north of Memory Lane, to accommodate a third southbound through lane at the intersection. This additional through lane would result in the relocation of the existing dedicated right -turn lane slightly west. The proposed widening would involve the partial acquisition of three parcels in order to accommodate the new total ROW widths (proposed to expand from 100 feet to 111 feet). The proposed intersection improvements would require relocation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, driveway approaches, and both public and private utilities (including the existing traffic signal). Due to the existing building setback requirements, the Project would require approval from the City Manager for landscape strip Exceptions for building setbacks per Municipal Code Section 41-781. The original approved 1990 FEIS/EIR proposed the same intersection lanes width and configuration as that proposed. The 1990 FEISIEIR considered a 117 -foot ROW width in order to accommodate the additional third through lane, specifically for the southbound travel lane. However, no specific take of adjoining properties was acknowledged although the existing ROW is only 100 feet. Thus, the Project changes clarify that in order to accommodate a third -through lane and bike lane, the Project requires to widen the existing street ROW width of 100 feet to 111 feet, with the street section width from 84 feet to 95 feet, and the partial acquisition of three properties. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Surrounding land uses consist of commercial and multi- and single-family residential uses; refer to Section 1.2. Project Location. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval or participation agreement). • City of Santa Ana Draft I November 2017 2-1 Environmental Checklist 75A-28 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 This page intentionally left blank. Draft I November 2017 2-2 Environmental Checklist 75A-29 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? State Route 91 is located approximately 10 miles north-east of the Project site.'- The Project would not be visible from SR -91. No impacts would occur in this regard. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? The proposed Project is located in a highly -urbanized area of the City of Santa Ana. The Project would widen the existing roadway ROW from 100 feet to 11 I feet, resulting in additional property take for the purposes of roadway use. These changes in character would be similar to those analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Per the 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures G-1 and G-2, the Project would be compatible with the Bristol Street Widening Project landscaping theme and a Xeriscape (climate appropriate landscaping) program would be considered. Existing perimeter fencing along Bristol Street would be relocated and replaced in-kind with a similar aesthetic treatment. These changes in character/quality would be nominal, compared to that previously considered. As such, the proposed Project would not result in substantially greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: G-1 A consistent theme will be developed and implemented for the landscaping within the public right-of- way for Bristol Street as a part of the street widening project. G-2 Consideration will be given to the implementation of a Xeriscape landscaping program. Such a program would involve the use of low -maintenance, drought -tolerant plant materials, thereby reducing long-term costs for maintenance and water consumption. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Light and glare are currently generated from various sources within the Project area (e.g., commercial and retail businesses, signage, street lighting, and parking lot lighting). The proposed Project does not involve the construction of any habitable structures. Relocation of the street lighting fixtures would occur. Therefore, no new sources of light or glare would result with implementation of the proposed Project. The proposed Project would not generate additional daytime or nighttime illumination beyond that currently experienced within the area. The relocation of the traffic signal pole would be required to meet the Citywide Design Guidelines and the 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure J-1 pertaining to cut-off shielding techniques. With compliance with the 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation, the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: J-1 Consideration will be given to the selection of new street fixtures which have cut-off shields to minimize light and glare nuisances for residential properties adjoining Bristol Street. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. Califomia Department of Transportation, California Scenic Highway Mapping System, http://www.dot.ca.gov/ hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm, accessed August 30, 2017. Draft I November 2017 3-2 Environmental Consequences 75A-30 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES This section describes the effects of the proposed Project as compared to those identified in the previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR document, and to existing conditions and any changes in regulatory setting since the previously approved 1990 FEIS/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 an FEIS/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, comparing the effects of the Project modifications as compared to those analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, is found in AppendixA, Modified Initial Study Checklist. • Aesthetics • Mineral Resources • Agricultural and Forestry Resources • Noise • Air Quality • Population and Housing • Biological Resources • Public Services • Cultural Resources • Recreation • Geology and Soils • Transportation/Traffic • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Tribal Cultural Resources • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Utilities/Service Systems • Hydrology/Water Quality Mandatory Findings of Significance • Land Use A summary of impacts of the previously approved Bristol Street Widening Project and the mitigation measures imposed is provided along with an analysis of the potential impacts resulting from the proposed Project and whether those impacts substantially exceeds those discussed in the previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR. 3.1 AESTHETICS This section corresponds with the following 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections: • Subsection A, Landform Modification; • Subsection G, Urban Landscaping; • Subsection J, Light and Glare; and • Subsection K, Aesthetic Considerations. Would the project: 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 FEIS/EIR. The Project is located within a highly developed urban area of the City of Santa Ana. Existing land use near the Project site consists of multi- and single-family residential uses, commercial uses, and vacant land. No scenic vistas are located within the Project area. No impact to scenic vistas would result from the proposed Project. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. Draft I November 2017 3-1 Environmental Consequences 75A-31 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 3.2 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES The previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR did not include evaluation for agricultural resources, as no agricultural resources are located within the area of analysis. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies unay refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts our agriculture and farmland In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project, and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board Would the project: 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 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program classifies the Project site as Urban and Built-up land3. No Prime, Unique, or Farland of 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 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Conflict with existing zoningfor agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? The Project site is located within a highly -urbanized area in the City of Santa Ana. Lands within the Project area are designated General Commercial and Low Density Residential as identified in the City of Santa Ana's General Plan. The zoning designation of properties within the Project area are Community Commercial and Specific Development (SD27). No agricultural uses exist on site or in the vicinity, and the Project would not conflict with a Williamson Act contract as none exist in the Project area. The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 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 section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? The Project site is located within a highly -urbanized area in the City of Santa Ana. The zoning designation of properties within the Project area are Community Commercial and Specific Development (SD27). No forest land or timberland production exist on site or in the vicinity, and the Project would not conflict zoning pertaining to these resources. The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. ' California Department of Conservation, Orange County Important Farmland 2014, ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/ FMMP/pdf/2014/ora 14.pdf, accessed August 17, 2017. Draft I November 2017 3-3 Environmental Consequences 75A-32 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 d) Result in the loss offorest land or conversion offorest land to non forest use? Refer to Response 3.2(c). Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. e) involve other changes in the existing environment which, dire to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion offorest land to ear forest use? Refer to Responses 3.2 (a) through 3.2(c). Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed, in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.3 AIR QUALITY This section corresponds with 1990 FEIS/EIR Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection H, Air Quality, and Subsection V, Construction Impacts of the previously approved. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to crake the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air qualityplan? The proposed 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 FEIS/EIR. According to the 1990 FEIS/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, prepared by Mohle, Grover & Associates, dated 1983.4 It was also recommended in the Arterial Highway Element— Santa Ana Element — Santa Ana Transportation Corridor State II Alternative Analysis, prepared by Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas, Inc., dated 1983. The proposed widening is also consistent with the recommendation found in the Intercity Liaison Committee — Five - Year Transportation Study Update to 1990, prepared by Basmaciyan-Darnell, Inc., dated 1985.' Furthermore, the proposed Project would improve traffic operations through the Project condor. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. The Bristol Street Widening Project is included in SCAG's 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS): A Plan for Mobility, Accessibility, Sustainability and a High Quality of Life (2016 RTP) (RTP ID ORA125).6 The Project is also currently listed in SCAG's financially constrained 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (2017 FTIP) for fiscal year 2016/2017 — 2021/2022. The Project entry in the 2017 FTIP identifies the following scope of work: BRISTOL ST (MEMORY LANE TO 17TH STREET AND 3RD STREET TO ST. ANDREWS PLACE) WIDEN FROM 4 TO 6 LANES; split project ORA150003, ORA150004, ORA150005, ORA150006.7 4 POWER Engineers, Bristol Street Widening PhaselllA—Civic Center Drive to iVashington Avenue Environmental Impact Report Addendum, January 20, 2015. 5 Ibid. 6 Southern California Association of Governments, 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), Transportation System Project List, 2016. 1 Southern California Association of Governments, Final 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program, 2016. Draft I November 2017 3-4 Environmental Consequences 75A-33 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 The 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 SIPS for achieving the NAAQS. The FHWA determined the RTIP to conform to the SIP. The proposed widening of Bristol Street, from Memory Lane to 17" Street has been included in the FTIP since 1992. The FTI' gives priority to eligible Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) identified in the SIP and provides sufficient funds to provide for their implementation. The FHWA determined the FTIP to conform to the SIP on December 16, 2016. No significant impacts would occur. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Furthermore, the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is designated by the state and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as nonattainment for ozone (Os), and particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less (PM2.5) and attainment/maintenance for carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less PMui. 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 exceedance of the ambient air quality standards (AAQS). 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, maintain vehicle capacity, reduce idling and result in a reduction in air pollutant emissions as was previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Thus, no new or substantial increase of impacts have been identified and no new mitigation measures are required. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable 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? All proposed areas of acquisition include vacant portions of commercial and multi -family residential properties. These vacant areas consist of dirt, paving/asphalt or ornamental landscaping. The Project proposes to change the existing street section from a total ROW width of 100 feet to 111 feet, which is a nominal increase over what was previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. No structure modification/demolition would be required as part of these new partial acquisitions to accommodate the Project. As determined in the 1990 FEIS/EIt, short-term construction emissions from the Project would be below the SCAQMD's significance thresholds for all criteria pollutants, including PM10 and PM2.5, even in the absence of specific dust reduction measures. Construction phasing for the proposed Project would be similar to the construction activities and phasing described in the 1990 FEIS/EIR for the Project. Therefore, the construction emissions would be similar to those in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. It has been determined that construction emissions would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Thus, impacts are considered less than significant. 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 air quality impact. In addition, mitigation measures included in the 1990 FEIS/EIR would further reduce construction -related air quality impacts. The proposed Project would improve traffic flow and reduce idling, as the Project would add one additional through lane and this configuration was analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. The modifications to the 1990 FEIS/EI2 would add more ROW to the existing right -turn lane and serve to increase traffic flow through the intersection, but would not increase the overall road capacity, previously considered lane configuration, or air quality impacts disclosed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. The proposed Project would result in the same operational air emissions as that considered in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, which were below SCAQMD thresholds. Thus, no new or substantial increase of impacts have been identified and no new mitigation measures are required. Draft I November 2017 3-5 Environmental Consequences 75A-34 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: H-1 SCAQMD Rule 403 will be adhered to, insuring the clean-up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site. H-2 Adequate watering techniques will be employed to partially mitigate the impact of construction - generated dust particulates. H-3 Construction equipment will be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. H-5 The use of energy efficient lighting along Bristol Street (low pressure sodium vapor lights) will be considered to reduce emissions at the power plant serving the area. H-6 Traffic signals along Bristol Street will continue to be synchronized (AQMP control measures K2). H-7 Construction activities will be halted during Stage One and Stage Two smog alerts. Mitigation Measures: No additional new mitigation measures are required. 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, PMro, 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. As mentioned above, the development of the proposed Project demonstrates that construction and operational activities would not result in emissions in excess of SCAQMD's threshold values. 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's emissions to add significantly to any cumulative impact. Furthermore, it should be noted that the proposed Project would improve traffic flow, reduce idling, and encompass the same amount of road capacity for with the existing lane configuration. 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 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures H-1 through H-3 and H-5 through H-7. 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. As per the 1990 FEIS/EIR, it was determined that sensitive receptors in the vicinity appeared to experience carbon monoxide levels that exceeded state and federal standards. Additionally, it was found that under future conditions with the Bristol Street Widening Project, sensitive land uses adjacent to the intersections analyzed reduced carbon monoxide levels to less than significant once the sensitive receptors were setback far enough from the intersections. It was also noted that the carbon monoxide concentrations were only analyzed during "worst case" conditions and did not reflect concentrations which were more likely to occur which would be less than significant compared to what was observed. The Project configuration, which was also analyzed as part of the 1990 FEIS/EIR, would serve to increase traffic flow through the intersection, but would not increase the overall road capacity compared to the 1990 FEIS/EIR, and would not result in an increase in the pollutant concentrations near sensitive receptors, as previously analyzed the 1990 FEIS/EIR. In addition, as determined in the 1990 FEIS/EIR, the proposed modifications would increase traffic flow and reduce traffic idling, which would decrease vehicle emissions. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Draft I November 2017 3.6 Environmental Consequences 75A-35 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures H-1 through H-3 and H-5 through H-7. Mitigation Measures: No additional new mitigation measures are required. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ofpeople? 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-term, 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 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No additional new mitigation measures are required 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection E, Streambed Modification. Would the project: 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 plaits, policies, or regulations, or by the California Deparhnent of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The Project site is located within a highly -urbanized area within the City of Santa Ana. No sensitive natural habitat or special -status species exist 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 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or otter sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plats, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Gante or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Refer to Response 3.4(a). No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities are identified in the Project vicinity. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. C) Have a substantial adverse effect oil 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, felling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Refer to Response 3.4(a). No federally protected wetlands are identified in the Project area or vicinity. The proposed Project is located within a highly -urbanized area of the City of Santa Ana. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Draft I November 2017 3-7 Environmental Consequences 75A-36 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No 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? As the proposed Project is located within a highly -urbanized area of the City of Santa Ana, the 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. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation: policy or ordinance? The proposed Project may result in the removal of existing landscaping, including trees. As such, removal or planting of trees is required to comply with the City of Santa Ana Municipal Code, Chapter 33, Article VII, Regulation of the. Planting, Maintenance, and Removal of Trees. With compliance with the City's Municipal Code, 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 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required. j) 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 Project site is not located within a habitat conservation plan. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection T, Cultural Resources. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §75064.5? No structure modification would result with implementation of the Project. Furthermore, the proposed Project would only require limited depths of excavations (maximum depth of 10 feet). Although the majority of excavation is anticipated to occur in non-native fill materials, should unknown potential historical resources be uncovered, implementation of mitigation measure T-1 in the previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Draft I November 2017 3-8 Environmental Consequences 75A-37 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: T-1 If potential archaeological resources are encountered during grading, all work will be halted in that particular location until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the recovered materials. Mitigation Measures: No 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. The proposed Project would not result in archaeological impacts greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures T-1. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleoutological resource or site or unique geologic feature? As documented in Chapter VI, Resources Element, of the County of Orange General Plan, the Project site is not located in an area of paleontological sensitivity. Soils occurring in the Project area are San Emigdio a 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 FEIS/EIR would result from Project implementation. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? The Project site is located within a highly -urbanized area within the City of Santa Ana. Cathedral Memorial Gardens is located approximately 2 miles north-west of the Project site. 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 CPRC 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 an impact to human remains greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section corresponds with the following 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections: • Subsection A, Landform Modification; • Subsection B, Seismic Hazards; 9 United States Department of Agriculture, Web Soil Survey, https://websoilsurvey.se.egov.usda.gov/AppfwebSoil Survey.aspx, accessed August 2, 2017. 9 Ibid. Draft I November 2017 3-9 Environmental Consequences 75A-38 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 • Subsection C, Erosion Impacts; and • Subsection F, Water Quality. Would theproject. 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 nmst recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the 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. The City of Santa Ana is not included in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map10. The Project site is not underlain by an active fault. The closest faults are the EI Modeno Fault, approximately eight miles to the northeast and the Newport -Inglewood Fault approximately 15 miles to the southwest. The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? The El Modeno fault is the closest fault to the Project site and is the most likely source of ground shaking impacts". The Project proposes intersection improvements and would not expose people or structures to adverse ground shaking impact. The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/BIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. iii) Seisrnic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? According to the City's General Plan, the Project site is identified as having high -medium liquefaction potential. However, the Project does not propose any new habitable structures. Implementation of 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure B-2, to replace surface level structures with structures that have extensive subsurface footings (such as traffic signals) that reach stable material would reduce any structural impacts from ground failure to less than significant. The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: B-2 Consideration will be given to installing and replacing surface level structures such as street lights, traffic signals and utility poles, with structures that have extensive subsurface footings that reach stable material. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 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 FEIS/EIR. 10 City of Santa Ana, City of Sana Ana General Plan, adopted September 1982, as amended. California Geological Survey, Fault Activity Map of California, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/ App/index.html, accessed August 3, 2017. Draft I November 2017 3-10 Environmental Consequences 75A-39 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No 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, the anticipated erosion impact would be nominal. The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: C-2 Straw or other suitable materials will be placed over uncovered soils, as needed, during street construction activities. This would reduce the amount of erosion. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 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 air or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? The 1990 FEIS/EIR indicated that there are no instances of undisturbed, natural soils. The Project site located in an area identified as having high to medium subsidence for liquefaction. However, the Project area is fully developed with urban uses within the City of Santa Ana and the proposed Project would be constructed in accordance with the standards of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Implementation of 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measure B-2, to replace surface level structures with structures that have extensive subsurface footings that reach stable material would reduce any structural impacts from ground failure to less than significant. The proposed Project would not create greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure B-2. Mitigation Measures: No 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? The proposed Project would not include construction of any habitable structures nor would the Project increase the number of persons at the Project site. Thus, 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 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure B-2. Mitigation Measures: No 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 and the proposed Project would not create greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. Draft I November 2017 3-11 Environmental Consequences 75A-40 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS The previously approved 1990 FEIS/EIR did not include evaluation for Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, as such an analysis was not required in the CEQA guidelines at the time the 1990 FEIS/EIR was prepared. On September 6, 1990, the City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency certified the 1990 FEIS/EIR that analyzed the potential impacts associated with the Bristol Street Widening Project, which focused on improvements that would result in proposed widening of Bristol Street, from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane, in the City of Santa Ana. Although this previous environmental document did not include a GHG analysis, a supplemental environmental analysis of GHG impacts cannot be required absent new information on that front. (Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development [CREED] v. City of San Diego, [2011] 196 Cal.AppAth 515, 531.) Information on the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on climate was known long before the City approved the 1990 FEIS/EIR. (Id.) Thus, the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on climate could have been raised in 1990 when the City considered the FEIS/EIR. A challenge to a FEIS/EIR must be brought within 30 days of the lead agency's notice of approval. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21167[b].) Under Public Resources Code section 21166(c), an agency may not require a supplemental environmental review unless new information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the FEIS/EIR was approved, becomes available. After a project has been subjected to environmental review, the statutory presumption flips in favor of the project proponent and against further review. (Moss v. County of Humboldt [2008] 162 CaLApp.4th 1041, 1049-1050.) "'[S]ection 21166 comes into play precisely because in-depth review has already occurred [and] the time for challenging the sufficiency of the original EIR has long since expired."' (Id., 1050.) There is no competent evidence of new information of severe impact, and thus the City may rely on an addendum. Accordingly, the City finds that GHG impacts and climate change are not "new information" under Public Resources Code Section 21166. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? GHG were not evaluated in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Construction activities would consume fuel and result in the generation of GHG emissions. Construction of the Project is anticipated to occur over a one-year period. 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 acquiring additional ROW from what was originally analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. The additional ROW would not change the roadway capacity or over all lane configuration from what was analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. As the Project involves roadway improvements and not a trip generating land use, only carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from mobile -sources are applicable. Similar to the other criteria pollutants, the highest emissions would occur between 0 to 10 miles per hour (mph) and 50 mph and above. The proposed Project would improve traffic flow and reduce idling. Because the Project would improve traffic flow within the Project area, the Project would result in reduced CO2 emissions. Modifications involving additional ROW would not result in a change to the road capacity, lane configuration, and impacts that were identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. GHG emissions would be nominal in relation to the global scale of GHG emissions, and there is no evidence that mitigation is necessary for the Project modifications to further demonstrate compliance with the GHG reduction targets of Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 32. Consequently, GHG emissions associated with the Project would be less than significant. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. Draft 1 November 2017 3-12 Environmental Consequences 75A-41 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? In December 2015, the City of Santa Ana adopted the Climate Action Plan (CAP) as a commitment to improving quality of life by reducing carbon pollution and energy use, both from its own operations and from the community as a whole. To develop this CAP, an inventory was conducted to determine baseline GHG emissions from the community and from municipal operations for calendar year 2008. A forecast was made of business -as -usual emissions in the absence of any emissions reduction actions. This forecast was then adjusted to account for the emissions reduction expected from statewide policies and from actions that have already been taken by the City since the baseline inventory. Based on community input, suggestions from City staff, analysis of other communities' climate action plans, and consultant recommendations, a list of measures to reduce emissions was developed. Reaching the emissions reduction goals will require residents, businesses, and City government to work together. The result will be reduced traffic congestion, improved air quality, lower energy use and cost, and improved quality of life for the entire community. The following measures from the CAP are applicable to the proposed Project: • Traffic Signal Synchronization Program: Corridors with synchronized and coordinated traffic signals tend to have shorter travel times, less delay, and reduced congestion. These factors combine reduced fuel usage and emissions. Improvements of intersection operations would help achieve City reduction goals by reducing idling emissions, decreasing congestion and improving traffic flow. • Design Guidelines for Internal Pedestrian Connectivity: Internal pedestrian connections such as a sidewalk within a site are an important factor in facilitating non -automotive travel. The level of connectivity relates to the ability to travel within the site to other locations without having to use vehicles or an external roadway network which decrease emissions. As noted above, the Project would widen the Bristol Street ROW to accommodate a planned roadway/intersection improvement. The Project would improve traffic flow, reduce idling emissions, thereby reducing GHG emissions. The proposed Project would not conflict with the CAP because it would not increase GHG emissions. The Project would also implement the appliance CAP measures noted above and would further decrease emissions through traffic signal synchronization and the design of an internal pedestrian sidewalk. The Project modifications would not conflict with CAP reduction targets. Additionally, 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 pertaining to GHG emissions. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. 3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection V, Construction Impacts, and Subsection X, Hazardous Materials. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The proposed intersection improvements would require relocation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, driveway approaches, and both public and private utilities (including the existing traffic signal). Any removal of roadway pavement striping will be required to be surveyed for lead-based paint prior to removal, in compliance with the applicable local, state, and federal regulations administered through the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health. Draft I November 2017 3-13 Environmental Consequences 75A-42 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 No other routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials is anticipated as a result of the proposed Project. Thus, compliance with existing regulations would ensure that impacts are not greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No 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? As listed in Tablel. Proposed Propertv Acquisition, a total of three Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs) (002-261- 06, -29, and -30) would be partially acquired as a result of the proposed intersection improvements; refer to Exhibit 5 Proposed Riehl -of -Way Acquisition. All proposed areas of acquisition include vacant portions of commercial and multi -family residential properties. These vacant areas consist of bare soils, paving/asphalt, or ornamental landscaping. Based on information maintained by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), APN 002- 261-06 (currently a vacant disturbed property located at 2702 N. Bristol Street) was historically Chevron Service Station #9-8787.[2 On January 28, 1999, three 10,000 -gallon gasoline underground storage tanks (USTs) and one 1,000 -gallon used oil UST were removed from the property. According to the SWRCB, a release from the USTs, clarifier, sump, and degreaser were reported during tank removal. Site characterization of potential contaminates was completed and, based on groundwater monitoring, determined that only the soil was affected above regulatory thresholds. Contaminated soils were excavated. Based on a case closure letter issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), dated October 22, 2001, completion of the site investigation, remedial action, and groundwater monitoring was completed. 13 No further action related to the reported release is required based on the current land use. According to the 1990 FEIS/EIR, ROW impacts to businesses that may generate hazardous waste or sites that contain underground storage tanks will occur with implementation of the preferred alternative. The 1990 FEIS/EIR acknowledged that it is likely that implementation of the preferred alternative would require the removal of USTs or aboveground storage tanks, or modifications to sites that have historically been handling, processing, or storing hazardous materials. Such activities have the potential to release hazardous wastes into the air or into the ground, but standard construction practices, which would involve careful coordination of design plans or prior notification of construction activity, are expected to minimize these risks and to minimize any disruptions. Thus, compliance with existing regulations and the 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures would ensure that impacts are not greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: X-1 The City of Santa Ana's Public Works Director will coordinate closely with all agencies and companies which maintain underground or at -grade utility or energy facilities within the areas to be disturbed by project construction activities. Preliminary and final design plans will be made available to such agencies for review and comment. At least 48 hours prior to commencement of any excavation activities, the City will contact the Underground Service Alert to notify the affected utility/energy purveyors who can place their personnel at the excavation site to assist in the location of underground facilities during the exploratory digging immediately preceding excavation. In this manner, the risk of line rupture to natural gas, petroleum, and sewer facilities, which might release hazardous substances and odors in to the air, can be minimized. X-2 Should any unidentified substances, odors, leaking underground tanks, or other mysterious and potentially hazardous materials be encountered during project construction, work in that area will be halted and the Santa Ana Fire Department's Hazardous Materials. Team will be contacted to evaluate the materials and to define appropriate remedial measures. 12 State Water Resources Control Board, Geo Tracker, http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/, accessed July 24, 2017. 11 Ibid. Draft November 2017 3-14 Environmental Consequences 75A-43 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM I Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 a X-3 The removal of underground storage tanks will be in accordance with all applicable regulations. For any service stations that will be partially acquired or displaced, the City will request that the owners remove the underground gasoline tanks prior to property acquisition. If the owners do not remove the underground tanks, the City will include the following statement in the right-of-way agreement: "It is understood the property being acquired in this transaction may contain hazardous waste which must be removed or otherwise treated under state or federal Law to protect the public health. If hazardous waste is found to exist on the property, the State may exercise its right to bring an action, if necessary, to recover clean-up costs from the grantors or any others who are ultimately determined to have responsibility for the hazardous waste condition of the property." Mitigation Measures: No 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? The schools closest to the Project site are Santiago Elementary School (located approximately 0.46 mile south at 2212 N. Baker Street, Santa Ana) and Riverdale Elementary School (located approximately 0.60 mile west at 13222 Lewis Street, Garden Grove). Thus, no schools are located within one-quarter mile of the Project site and impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No 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 Project site includes a former service station where gasoline was reported to have contaminated the soil; the site completed site remediation through appropriate state and local agency standards as required. To that end, the RWQCB issued a case closure letter dated October 22, 2001 stating that no further action was required for the site. As discussed in Response 3.8(b), compliance with existing regulations and mitigation measures from the 1990 FEIS/EIR would ensure that impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EU3 Mitigation Measures X-1 through X-3. Mitigation Measures: No 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, located approximately 5.9 miles southeast of the Project site. The proposed Project would not introduce any new risks or increase risks associated with the Project. Impacts in this regard would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. Draft I November 2017 3-15 Environmental Consequences 75A-44 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 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. Impacts in this regard would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? During construction, the disruption of traffic and access along Bristol Street and Memory lane would temporarily affect the mobility of emergency vehicles. However, provisions would be made for interim access through the Project corridor and to adjoining properties; traffic control plans would be prepared detailing provisions for vehicular movement and access through the Project corridor during construction. Advance warning and information signs would be used to inform motorists during the construction process. It is expected that two-way travel would be maintained along Bristol Street during construction. Although the proposed Project may interfere with an emergency evacuation plan, it would be short term during construction and mobility would improve once the Project is completed. Compliance with mitigation measures from the 1990 FEIS/EIR would ensure that impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: V-10 Traffic control plans will be prepared prior to each phase of construction. All traffic warning and control devices should comply to the provisions of the State of California Manual of Traffic Controls. V-12 The police and fire departments will be notified of construction at least one (1) month in advance, as to the particulars of the project (i.e., project time schedule, and areas to be disrupted, etc.). This action would give the police and fire departments sufficient time to notify its personnel of any significant impediments to traffic. V-13 The City will notify the police department at least 48 hours in advance of any turning changes. A minimum three (3) signs are required for each indicated change and/or prevention of movement. V-16 If feasible, construction activities and lane closures will occur primarily during non -peak driving periods. Mitigation Measures: No 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 is located in a highly -urbanized area of the City of Santa Ana. There are no wildlands in the Project vicinity and no new significant impacts would result with Project implementation. Impacts in this regard would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. Draft I November 2017 3.16 Environmental Consequences 75A-45 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Proiect No. 17-6883 3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section corresponds with the following 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections: • Subsection C, Erosion Impacts; • Subsection D, Floodplain/Floodivay Encroachment; and • Subsection F, Water Quality. Would theprojeetr a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the EPA has established regulations under the NPDES program to control direct storm water discharges. Should 1.0 acre or more of site disturbance occur, those activities would be subject to the NPDES program for the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The proposed Project would only impact approximately 0.39 acres, which is less than the 1.0 -acre threshold. Thus, the Project would not be subject to NPDES requirements, as potential waste discharge would be nominal. Furthermore, the Project would be required to comply with the 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure C-2, involving the placement of straw or other suitable materials over uncovered soils, as needed, during street construction activities, further reducing the amount of erosion occurring at the Project site. Regarding operations, the Project would not increase the capacity of the roadway or the number of vehicles using the Project area. Therefore, impacts to water quality would be similar to those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure C-2 Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 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 proposed 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. Impacts in this regard would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. C) Substantially alter the eeisting drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a strewn or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? The proposed Project would only nominally increase the paved/impervious areas of the Project site. This nominal increase would not result in a substantial increase in erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Further, implementation of 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure C-2 would reduce any potential erosion/siltation impacts during construction. Thus, impacts in this regard would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure C-2 Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. Draft I November 2017 3-17 Environmental Consequences 75A-46 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 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? Currently, the Project site only includes curb and no catch basin is present. As a result, seasonal ponding does occur along this portion of Bristol Street. The proposed Project would result in a nominal increase in impervious ground surfaces. However, development of the Project would result in the relocation of the existing curb features at the Project site. Thus, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase compared to the existing condition. Further, Project development may include extension of the existing storm water pipeline system (located on the eastern side of Bristol Street) through a new lateral connection and new catch basin at the Project site. These improvements, if constructed, would result in a reduction of existing flooding and would be a beneficial impact. Thus, impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No 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 ofpolluted runoff? Refer to Response 3.9(a). Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Refer to Response 3.9(a). Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 9) Place housing within a 100 year flood hazard area as mapped oil a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation nap? The Project site is located outside of the 100 -year flood zone.14 Further, the proposed Project would not construct any housing. Therefore, no impact would result from the proposed Project in this regard. Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. h) Place within a 100year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Refer to Response 3.9(g). Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 14 Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA Flood Map Service Center, https://msc.fema.gov/portaUse=h? AddressQuery=memory%201ane%2C%20santa%20ana#seamhresultsmehor, accessed August 3, 2017. Draft I November 2017 3-18 Environmental Consequences 75A-47 Bristol Street and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 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 Project does not involve the construction of new habitable structures or people at the Project site. Therefore, the Project would not expose people or habitable structures to a significant flooding risk beyond that which already exists. Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? The Project site is located approximately 15 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean; therefore, the likelihood of tsunami impacting the site is minimal. The Project site and vicinity are highly urbanized and there are no nearby water bodies or unusual slopes or geologic features in the area. No impacts involving seiche, tsunami, or mudflow are anticipated. Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measure: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section rv, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection A, Landform Modification. Would the project: a) Physically divide are established community? The proposed Project involves the widening of the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane; the proposed Project would not divide an established community. Although the proposed widening of Bristol Street within the Project limits would result in partial acquisition of existing properties, the Project would not create a physical barrier to, or separate, a community. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIK Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plait, 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? According to the City of Santa Ana General Plan (General Plan), the Project area is designated General Commercial (GC) and Low Density Residential (LDR-7). The zoning designation of properties within the Project area are Specific Development (SD27) which is developed as the Portofino Apartments and Community Commercial (Cl) which allows for retail and service uses. 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 designations and would not create a new conflict. It is acknowledged that due to building setback requirements, the Project would require approval from the City Manager for landscape strip Exceptions for building setbacks per Municipal Code Section 41-781. With City Manager approval, the Project would be consistent with the Municipal Code requirements. No significant impacts would result and impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Draft I November 2017 3-19 Environmental Consequences 75A-48 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No 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, and is located within a highly -urbanized area within the City of Santa Ana. The proposed Project would not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community. No impact is anticipated. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection W, Consumption of Renewable and Non -Renewable Resources. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region and the residents of the state? The Project site is currently developed and does not contain any areas that are utilized for the extraction of mineral resources. Furthermore, the proposed Project would not involve excavation that would likely identify previously unidentified mineral resources. No impact to mineral resources would result from the proposed Project. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated an a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plat? The Project site is currently developed and is not delineated as a mineral resources recovery site by the City's General Plan. Implementation of the proposed Project would have no impact on the mineral resources and no mitigation measures are necessary. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.12 NOISE This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection I, Noise, and Subsection V, Construction Impacts. Would the project result in: 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? Draft I November 2017 3.20 Environmental Consequences 75A-49 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 The proposed Project involves widening the west side of Bristol Street, north of the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane, in an urbanized area of multi- and single-family residential uses, commercial uses, and vacant land. The widening of the proposed ROW from 100 feet to 111 feet will not substantially change the noise levels which were analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Changes to traffic noise impacts typically occur when there is a substantial horizontal alteration to the roadway. The Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol guidance per federal regulations (23 CFR 772) defines a substantial horizontal alteration as a project that halves the distance between the traffic noise source and the closest receptor between the existing condition to the future build condition. The existing distance from the ROW to the closest receptor is approximately 30 feet. When adding the additional 11 feet to the ROW, this is less than half of the distance which means that the Project does not cause a substantial horizontal alteration. The Proposed Project modifications would not result in any new long-term mobile and stationary noise impacts. Only nominal changes to grading or construction activities would occur. No increases to road vehicle capacity would occur. No new impacts have been identified and no new mitigation measures are required. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: I-1 Construction activities will take place only during the hours specified in the City of Santa Ana Noise Control Ordinance to reduce noise impacts during more sensitive time periods. I-2 All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000 feet of a dwelling shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained muffler exhaust systems. I-3 Stationary equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers such as residential areas. I-4 Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far as practical from occupied dwellings. I-5 Every effort will be made to create the greatest distance between noise sources and receptors during construction. I-6 The noisiest construction operations will be arranged to occur together in the construction program to avoid continuing periods of greater annoyance. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Refer to Response 3.12(a). During Project construction, noise associated with construction may intermittently dominate the noise environment in the immediate area of construction. 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- term, temporary, and cease upon completion of the proposed Project. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR with implementation of mitigation measures and would not be greater than what was previously analyzed. The proposed widening of Bristol Street and ROW acquisition just north of Memory Lane would involve additional ROW take at adjoining properties in order to accommodate the third southbound through lane (considered in the 1990 FEIS/EIR). These changes would be nominal and would result in similar noise levels as the 1990 FEIS/EIR, which would be below significant levels. The Proposed Project modifications would not result in any new long- term mobile and stationary noise impacts. No changes to grading or construction activities would occur. No increases to road vehicle capacity or lane configurations would occur. No new impacts have been identified and no new mitigation measures are required. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Draft I November 2017 3-21 Environmental Consequences 75A-50 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No 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 Responses 3.12(a) and 3.12(b). Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. 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 Response 3.12(a), for discussion regarding temporary noise impacts associated with Project construction. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures I-1 through I-6. Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required. e) For a project located within an airport land use plait or, where such a plait 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 - Orange County Airport, located approximately 5.9 miles from the proposed Project. No impacts would occur. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required. JJ 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? Refer to Response 3.12(e). The proposed Project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required. 3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING This section corresponds with the following 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections: • Subsection L, Population; • Subsection M, Housing Displacement; • Subsection N, Business Displacement; • Subsection O, Impacts on Neighborhood Character and Minority Groups; and • Subsection R, Effect on Assessed Property Values. Draft I November 2017 3-22 Environmental Consequences 75A-51 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for exanhple, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The proposed Project involves the partial acquisition of three parcels in order to widen Bristol Street, located within a highly urbanized and built -out area. The proposed Project is designed to accommodate the existing and future traffic volume and would not create new trips. The proposed Project would not result in additional impacts. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? A total of three properties would be partially acquired as a result of the proposed widening of Bristol Street. All proposed areas of acquisition include vacant portions of commercial and multi -family residential properties. These vacant areas consist of paving/asphalt or ornamental landscaping. The acquisitions 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. No removal of housing would occur. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Refer to Response 3.13(b). Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection P, Impacts on Community Facilities, and Subsection V, Constnmction Impacts. a) 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 serve ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: V Fire Protection? The proposed Project includes intersection improvements 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. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Draft I November 2017 3-23 Environmental Consequences 75A-52 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Police Protection? Refer to Response 3.14(a)(i). The proposed Project would not result in the need or increase the demand for police services in the area. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. C) Schools? The proposed Project does not involve any new development and no new population would result. Therefore, no schools or school services would be impacted by the proposed Project. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required. d) Parks? The proposed Project does not involve any new development and no new population would result. There are no parks within the Project limits, and no needs for additional park services would occur as a result of the proposed Project. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. e) Otherpublicfacilities? The proposed Project does not involve any new development and no new population would result. Therefore, the Project would not generate demands for other public facilities. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.15 RECREATION This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection P, Impact on Recreational Facilities. 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 involves the widening of Bristol Street, just north of Memory Lane, to accommodate a third southbound through lane within a highly urbanized and built -out area in the City. The widening of Bristol Street would not induce growth, nor create demand for recreation -related services. Furthermore, the proposed Project Draft I November 2017 3.24 Environmental Consequences 75A-53 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 would not result in the physical deterioration of recreational facilities. No mitigation measures are required with regards to recreational resources. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Refer to Response 3.15(a). The proposed Project does not include, nor would it require, construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, no adverse physical impact on the environment would occur from such facilities as a result of the proposed Project. No mitigation measures are required. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection U, Impacts to Transportation Facilities, and Subsection V, Construction Impacts. 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 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 proposed 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 FEIS/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, prepared by Mohle, Grover & Associates, dated 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., dated 1983. The proposed Project is also consistent with the recommendation found in the Intercity Liaison Committee - Five -Year Transportation Study Update to 1990, prepared by Basmaciyan-Damell, Inc., dated 1985. Furthermore, the proposed Project would improve traffic operations through the Project corridor. Based on traffic count data provided as part of the Measure M2 Comprehensive Transportation Funding Program Call for Projects, prepared by the City of Santa Ana, for the Orange County Transportation Authority, dated October 20, 2016, the existing Level of Service (LOS) at the Bristol Street/Memory Lane intersection is LOS C in the AM Peak Hour and a LOS E during the PM Peak Hour. Upon completion of the proposed Project, the Peak Hour LOS at this intersection would be improved to a LOS B in the AM Peak Hour and a LOS D in the PM Peak Hour. Therefore, the Project would result in an overall beneficial impact pertaining to traffic and would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required. b) Conflict with an applicable congestion managennent program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency far designated roads or highways? Draft I November 2017 3-25 Environmental Consequences 75A-54 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 According to the 2015 Orange County Congestion Management Program, prepared by the Orange County Transportation Authority, dated November 2015, the intersection of Bristol Street and Memory Lane is not a CMP intersection, nor is this intersection located along a CMP Highway System. Further, as discussed in Response 3.16(a), the proposed Project would result in an improvement to both the AM and PM Peak Hour LOS. As the proposed Project would not increase the capacity of the roadway network, the Project would not result in greater impacts than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No 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 5.9 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 not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No 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., Jami equipment)? The proposed Project would improve the traffic flow at the Bristol Street and Memory Lane intersection and would not create any sharp curves or other incompatible uses. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? The proposed Project would improve traffic operations along Bristol Street in the long-term. During the construction phase traffic flow along Bristol Street within the Project limits could be temporarily affected, including the mobility of emergency vehicles; however, access, including two-way travel would be maintained through the Project condor during construction. Traffic control plans would be prepared prior to construction to facilitate traffic movement through the Project condor during construction. Although the proposed Project may interfere with emergency access in the short-term, it would improve emergency access once the Project is completed. Implementation of 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures V-10, V-12, V-13 and V-16 would reduce impacts associated with inadequate emergency access to a less than significant level. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures V-10, V-12, V-13, and V-16. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. fi Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety ofsuch facilities? The proposed Project would not conflict with any alternative transportation plan and would increase safety associated with improvements to the traffic operations through the Project area. The proposed Project would not Draft I November 2017 3-26 Environmental Consequences 75A-55 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 result in impacts greater than as described in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.17 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES As of July 1, 2015, California Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) was enacted and expanded CEQA by establishing a formal consultation process for California tribes within the CEQA process. The bill specifies that any project may affect or cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource would require a lead agency to "begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditional and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project." Section 21074 of AB 52 also defines a new category of resources under CEQA called tribal cultural resources. Tribal cultural resources are defined as "sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe" and is either listed on or eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources or a local historic register, or if the lead agency chooses to treat the resource as a tribal cultural resource. Notwithstanding, AB 52 applies to all new applications deemed complete on or after July 1, 2015. Thus, as the proposed improvements are an Amendment to the existing Bristol Street Widening Project, and not a new Application, AB 52 does not apply to this Project. On February 19, 2016, the California Natural Resources Agency proposed to adopt and amend regulations as part of AB 52 implementing Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations, CEQA Guidelines, to include consideration of impacts to tribal cultural resources pursuant to Government Code Section 11346.6. On September 27, 2016, the California Office of Administrative Law approved the amendments to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, and these amendments are addressed within this Addendum. a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is. i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined its Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or According to the City of Santa Ana, no Native American -related historical resources are present within the Project vicinity." Based on the 1990 FEIS/EIR, no historical or archaeological resources were identified in the Project vicinity. During public noticing period for the Bristol Street Widening Project, a letter received from the Office of Historic Preservation indicated that the Bristol Widening Project would not affect historic properties. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: T-1 If potential archeological resources are encountered during grading, all work will be halted in that particular location until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the recovered materials. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 15 City of Santa Ana, Propertyl formation Search, http://www.ci.mnta-ana.ca.us/property-info/, accessed August 17, 2017. Draft I November 2017 3-27 Environmental Consequences 75A-56 ew ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. The Project is not subject to AB 52 and did not undergo the AB 52 Consultation Process. Notwithstanding, the 1990 FEIS/EIR, no historical or archaeological resources were identified in the Project vicinity pertaining to Native American resources. Further, during public noticing periods, letters received from the Office of Historic Preservation indicated that the Bristol Widening Project would not affect historic properties. No correspondence from any tribes were received during the 1990 FEIS/EIR. No new impacts have been identified. Should any unknown tribal cultural resources be uncovered during grading/site disturbance activities, the Project would be required to comply with the 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure T-1. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: Refer to 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measure T-1. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.18 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS This section corresponds with the 1990 FEIS/EIR, Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection S, Effect on Utilities, and Subsection V, Construction Impacts. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? The proposed Project entails intersection improvements; such improvements would not result in the generation of wastewater. No new significant impact is anticipated. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treahnent facilities or expansion of eristingfacilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The proposed Project would not require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. No new significant impact is anticipated. Implementation of 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures V-14 and V-17 would reduce impacts to less than significant. Impacts would not be greater than that previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: V-14 Project plans and construction activities will be closely coordinated with local utility purveyors in order to make the necessary arrangements for the relocation of facilities and avoid or minimize any disruption to service. It is also recommended that the utilities provide adequate notice to its customers of any service disruptions. V-17 The City of Santa Ana's Public Works Director will coordinate closely with all agencies and companies which maintain underground or at -grade utility or energy facilities within the areas to be disturbed by project construction activities. Preliminary and final design plans will be made available to such agencies for review and comment. At least 48 hours prior to commencement of any excavation activities, the City will contact the Underground Service Alert to notify the affected utility/energy purveyors who can place their personnel at the excavation site to assist in the location of underground Draft I November 2017 3-28 Environmental Consequences 75A-57 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 facilities during the exploratory digging immediately preceding excavation. In this manner, the risk of line rupture to natural gas, petroleum, and sewer facilities, which might release hazardous substances and odors into the air, can be minimized. Mitigation Measures: No 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? As discussed in Response 3.9(d), the Project site currently includes only curb and no catch basin is present. As a result, seasonal ponding does occur along this portion of Bristol Street. The proposed Project would result in a nominal increase in impervious ground surfaces. The Project would result in the relocation of the existing curb features at the Project site and may include extension of the existing storm water pipeline system (located on the eastern side of Bristol Street) through a new lateral connection and new catch basin at the Project site. These improvements, if constructed, would result in a reduction of existing flooding and would be a beneficial impact. Thus, impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project front existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? The proposed Project entails the intersection improvements; as such, the Project would not result in any increase in water demand/consumption. Landscape improvements, if applicable, would not require any new or expanded water entitlements and would not be substantially increased, compared to that analyzed as part of the Bristol Street Widening Project. Thus, the proposed Project would not create any new significant environmental impact. Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No 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? Refer to Response 3.17(a) and 3.17(b). The proposed Project would not result in an increase in wastewater production. Impacts would not be greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No 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. Construction waste that cannot be recycled would be taken to available landfills. The closest receiving landfills for the City are the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill at 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road in Irvine, and the Olinda Alpha Landfill at 1942 N. Valencia Avenue in Brea. The Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, which is owned and operated by the Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department, opened in 1990, and has enough projected capacity to serve residents and businesses until approximately 2053.16 The Olinda Alpha Landfill opened in 1960, and has enough 16 Orange County Waste and Recycling, Frank R. Bowerman Landfill, http://www.oclmdfills.com/landfilYactive/ bowennan, accessed August 17, 2017. Draft I November 2017 3-29 Environmental Consequences 75A-58 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 projected capacity to serve residents and businesses until approximately 2030.1' Olinda's average disposal rate is nearly 7,000 tons per day (TPD), although it permitted up to 8,000 TPD. Thus, these facilities have 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 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable. Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 9) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Refer to Response 3.18(f). The proposed Project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The Project would comply with the City of Santa Ana'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 FEIS/EIR. Certified 1990 FEIS/EIR Mitigation Measures: No 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures are applicable Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required. 3.19 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Based on this Addendum, the proposed Project has not substantially changed in regard to the setting, design, impacts, and mitigation measures as described in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. New 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, substantially reduce file number or restrict the range of a rare. or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the majorperiods of California history or prehistory? The proposed Project would not result in impacts beyond those identified in the 1990 FEIS/EIR in this regard, 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 with compliance with the 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures. 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 ofprobable future projects)? Given the nature and scope of the proposed Project, and in consideration of mitigation measures that are included in the 1990 FEIS/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 relatively minor, temporary impacts which can be mitigated with implementation of measures included in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. Furthermore, potential long-term (operational) impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels through implementation of required 1990 FEIS/EIR mitigation measures. 17 Orange County Waste and Recycling, Olinda Alpha Landfill, http://www.oclmdfills.com/landfill/active/ olindalandfill, accessed October 16, 2017. Draft 1 November 2017 3.30 Environmental Consequences 75A-59 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Proiect No. 17-6883 4.0 REFERENCES The following references were utilized for the preparation of this Addendum: California Department of Conservation, Orange County Important Farmland 2014, ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/ FMMP/pdf/2014/oral4.pdf, accessed August 17, 2017. California Department of Transportation, California Scenic Highway Mapping System, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/ LandArch/l6_livability/scenic highways/index.htm, accessed August 30, 2017. California Geological Survey, Fault Activity Map of California, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/App/ index.html, accessed August 3, 2017. City of Santa Ana, City of Santa Ana General Plan, adopted September 1982, as amended. City of Santa Ana, Citywide Design Guidelines. City of Santa Ana, Final Environmental Impact statement (FEIS) for Bristol Street Widening from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane, dated 1990. City of Santa Ana, Property Information Search, http://www.ci.santa-ana.ca.us/property-info/, accessed August 17, 2017. City of Santa Ana, Measure M2 Comprehensive Transportation: Funding Program Call for Projects, dated October 20, 2016. Department of Conservation (DOC), Fault Activity Map of California, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/ App/index.html, accessed August 2017. Department of Toxic Substances Control, EnviroStor, http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/, accessed August 2, 2017. Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA Flood Map Service Center, https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search? AddressQuery=memory%201ane%2C%20santa%20ana#searchresultsanchor, accessed August 3, 2017. Orange County Transportation Authority, 2015 Orange County Congestion Management Program, dated November 2015. Orange County Waste and Recycling, Frank R. Bowerman Landfill, http://www.oclandfills.com/landfill/active bowerman, accessed August 17, 2017. Orange County Waste and Recycling, Olinda Alpha Landfill, http://www.oclandfills.com/landfill/active/ olindalandfill, accessed October 16, 2017. Google Earth, accessed September 2017. POWER Engineers, Bristol Street Widening Phase IIIA - Civic Center Drive to Washington Avenue Environmental Impact Report Addendum, January 20, 2015. Southern California Association of Governments, 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), Transportation System Project List, 2016. Southern California Association of Governments, Final 2017 Federal Transportation Improvement Program, 2016. State Water Resources Control Board, GeoTracker, http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/, accessed July 24, 2017. Draft I November 2017 4-1 References 75A-60 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 United States Department of Agriculture, Web Soil Survey, https://websoilsurvey.se.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoil Survey.aspx, accessed August 2, 2017. Draft I November 2017 4-2 References 75A-61 Appendix A Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-62 75A-63 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 Modified Initial Study Checklist The following Modified Initial Study 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 Subsequent or Supplemental EIS/EIR or an Addendum under Public Resources Code 21166 and Guideline Sections 15162, 15163, and 15164, respectively. For purposes of this study, references to "the proposal" in the left hand column questions refer to the modifications to the Project (proposed Project) as compared the Project improvements evaluated in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. The first four columns to the right of the modified checklist 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. Finally, the last column indicates whether or not a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR is needed. Moreover, a Subsequent or Supplemental 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 document. Draft I November 2017 1 Appendix A — Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-64 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft 1 November 2017 2 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-65 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEISIEIR Project Changes No Impact Less Than Significant Impact Less Than Significant After1999 Mitigation Potentially Significant Impact Impacts Disclosed? Subsequent or Supplemental EIR Required? 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X YES NO b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within X YES NO a state scenic highway? X YES NO c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? X YES NO d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 2. 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 Farmland X YES NO Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? — X YES NO b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act 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 section 4526), or X YESNO timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? ----....------..._. ®� X YES NO d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? 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 X YES NO conversion of forest land to non -forest use? 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X YES NO b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or X YES NO projected air quality violation? Draft 1 November 2017 2 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-65 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 3 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-66 New Impacts of Proposetl Previous FEIS/EIR Project Changes No Impact Less Than Significant Less Than Significant Potentially Significant Impacts Disclosed? Subsequent or Supplemental EIR Impact AnerlgSe Impact Required? Mitigation 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 X YES NO releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to - ----- substantial pollutant concentrations? X YES NO e) Create objectionable odors affecting a _ - ---- substantial number of people? X YES NO 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, or special -status species in local X YES NO 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 X YES regional plans, policies, or regulations or NO 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 to, marsh, vernal X YES NO pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with X established native resident or migratory YES NO wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, X such as a tree preservation policy or YES NO ordinance? Draft I November 2017 3 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-66 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 4 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-67 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEISIEIR Project Changes No Impact Less Than Significant Impact Less Than Significant After 1990 Mitigation Potentially Significant Impact Impacts Disclosed? Subsequent or Supplemental EIR Required? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other X YES NO approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as X YES NO defined in § 15064.5? --- b) Cause a substantial adverse change in - ----- the significance of an archaeological X YES NO resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique X YES T NO geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal ----------- X -------- ---- YES NO 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 State Geologist for the area X YES NO or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X YES NO iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? — -- X YES NO iv) Landslides? X YES -......... NO b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X YES NO Draft I November 2017 4 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-67 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 5 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-68 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEIS/EIR Project Changes No Less Than Less Than Potentially Impacts Subsequent or Impact Significant Significant Significant Disclosed? Supplemental EIR Impact After1990 Impact Required? Mitigation 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 X YES NO result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 16-1-B of the Uniform Building X YES NO Code (1994), creating substantial risks to fife or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems X YES NO where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generale greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a X YES NO significant impact on the environment? -----__.__-........... b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of X YES NO reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? 8. HAZARDS. Would the project involve: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine X YES NO transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ------------ b) Create a significant hazard to the public --------- or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions X YES NO involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, X YES NO substances, or 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 X YES NO Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Draft I November 2017 5 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-68 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Protect No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 6 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-69 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEISIEIR Project Changes No Impact Less Than Significant Impact Less Than Significant After1999 Potentially Significant Impact Impacts Disclosed? Subsequent or Supplemental EIR Required? Mitigation 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 X YES NO 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 result in a X YES NO safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency X YES NO 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 X YES NO wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? X YES NO 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- X YES NO 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 manner that would X YES NO result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off-site? Draft I November 2017 6 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-69 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 7 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-70 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEIS/EIR Project Changes No Less Than Less Than Potentially Impacts Subsequent or Impact Significant Significant Significant Disclosed? Supplemental EIR Impact After 1990 Impact Required? Mitigation 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 X YES NO 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 drainage systems or X YES NO provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? ---- X YES ------._........ NO D Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate X YES NO Map or other flood hazard delineation map? X YES NO h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? I) i) Expose people or structures to a ------------- - ------------- --- significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a X YES NO result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? — X _....._..'---..__...-- YES --' NO 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? X YES NO 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 X YES NO plan, local 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 community X YES NO conservation plan? Draft I November 2017 7 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-70 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 8 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-71 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEISIEIR Project Changes No Impact Less Than Significant Impact Less Than Significant Aftert990 Mitigation Potentially Significant Impact Impacts Disclosed?, Subsequent or Supplemental EIR Required? 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 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 X YES NO state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery X YES NO site delineated on a local 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 general plan or X YES NO noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X YES NO b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity X YES NO above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing X YES NO 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 use airport, would X YES NO the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Draft I November 2017 8 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-71 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 9 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-72 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEIS/EIR Project Changes No Impact Less Than Significant Impact Less Than Significant After1990 Mitigation Potentially Significant Impact Impacts Disclosed? Subsequent or Supplemental EIR Required? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project X YES NO 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 and businesses) or X YES NO indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of X YES NO replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of X YES NO 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 objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? X YES NO b) Police protection? X YES -NO T c) Schools? X YES NO 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 facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the X YES NO facility would occur or be accelerated? Draft I November 2017 9 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-72 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements - Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 10 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-73 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEISIEIR Project Changes • No Less Than Less Than Potentially Impacts Subsequent or Impact Significant Significant Significant Disclosed? Supplemental EIR Impact After 1990 Impact Required? Mitigation b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that X YES NO might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. 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 mass transit and non -motorized travel and X YES NO 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 measures, or other X YES NO 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 in traffic levels X YES NO 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 X YES NO dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency ------------ X -- - -- YES - NO access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise X YES NO decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Draft I November 2017 10 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-73 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 11 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-74 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEIS/EIR Project Changes No Less Than Less Than Potentially Impacts Subsequent or Impact Significant Significant Significant Disclosed? Supplemental EIR Impact After1990 Impact Required? Mitigation 17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources X YES NO as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1 k , or ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in X YES NO subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional X YES NO Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, X YES NO 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 existing facilities, the X YES NO construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available ---- ............................. _. to serve the project from existing X YES NO entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Draft I November 2017 11 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-74 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST Draft I November 2017 12 Appendix A- Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-75 New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEISIEIR Project Changes No Less Than Less Than Potentially Impacts Subsequent or Impact Significant Significant Significant Disclosed? Supplemental EIR Impact After 1990 Impact Required? Mitigation e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has X YES NO adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments? -- .... ....... f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the X YES NO project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid X YES NO waste? 19. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Responses to the following questions are discussed in Chapter 3. 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 X YES NO 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 project are considerable when X YES NO 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 cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Note: N/A = 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 state 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. Draft I November 2017 12 Appendix A- Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-75 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST New Impacts of Proposed Previous FEIS/EIR Project Changes No LessThan Less Than Potentially Impacts Subsequent or Impact Significant Significant Significant Disclosed? Supplemental EIR Impact After 1999 Impact Required? Mitigation c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. Responses to this section are discussed further in Chapter 3. Draft I November 2017 13 Appendix A - Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-76 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM Bristol Street and Memory Lane Intersection Improvements — Project No. 17-6883 This page intentionally left blank. Draft I November 2017 14 Appendix A — Modified Initial Study Checklist 75A-77 75A-78 " � F w•�t Y�� LRuf bt\ i- ��. � ' 'fir • , .a Ni -M { CNV 1 - t -`� 1, t 'ir •ry �'� � I.� '-:-''- jam_, if 0011 WU) Q z J W M 00 00 O > to W0� CL m iJ�z Z SOU X LU (j)v' W -j Lu w O^ W V/ w m Z 0011 75A-80