My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
5A Public Hearings 2021 0706
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2021
>
Packet 2021 0706
>
5A Public Hearings 2021 0706
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/1/2021 8:02:46 PM
Creation date
7/1/2021 7:50:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Agenda
Document Date (6)
7/6/2021
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
Reso 2021-105 Callan & East 14th Project CUP, Parking and Site Plan
(Approved by)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2021
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
1234
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
May 19, 2021 <br />Page 15 <br /> <br /> <br />5005-004acp <br /> <br /> printed on recycled paper <br />emissions as well as the public health risks to the surrounding community from <br />exposure to toxic air contaminants (“TACs”) generated by the Project, which are <br />new or more severe than previously analyzed. <br /> <br />The Checklist and the 2035 General Plan EIR were inconsistent in their <br />analysis of air quality impacts. The Checklist determined the Air Quality impacts <br />would be less than significant, but the General Plan EIR determined they would be <br />significant and unavoidable. <br /> <br />Our experts determined the Project’s construction and operational emissions <br />are underestimated, and therefore the Board’s approval of the Project was not based <br />on substantial evidence in violation of CEQA. Further, SWAPE determined that the <br />Checklist’s calculation regarding off-road vehicles is not supported by substantial <br />evidence.64 SWAPE also determined that the Checklist underestimated the <br />Project’s mobile source operational emissions. The Project’s mobile-source <br />emissions may constitute a new and potentially significant impact in the Project, <br />that was not addressed or mitigated in the prior EIR. An Infill EIR is required to <br />remedy these significant construction and operational emission analysis <br />deficiencies, in order to adequately mitigate such issues prior to Project approval by <br />the City Council. <br /> <br /> The Project’s air quality impacts remain unmitigated. The Project is not <br />consistent with the General Plan because General Plan Policy 31.04 provides that <br />the City must “Require new development to be designed and constructed in a way <br />that reduces the potential for future air quality problems, such as odors and the <br />emission of any and all air pollutants.”65 The Board therefore cannot approve the <br />Conditional Use Permit due to the inconsistency with the General Plan policy. <br />Further, the mitigation measures presented in the General Plan and Checklist <br />would not substantially mitigate the impacts of the Project. <br /> <br /> The Checklist approved by the Board does not ensure that best available <br />control technologies are used for operations that could generate air pollutants as <br />required by General Plan Policy EH-3.4.66 Further, the use of Tier-4 Interim <br />mitigation measures does not constitute sufficient mitigation. As SWAPE describes <br />in their comments, Tier 4 Interim measures do not constitute adequate mitigation <br /> <br />64 SWAPE Comments, p. 7. <br />65 General Plan p. 7-49. <br />66 General Plan p. 7-49. <br />74
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.