Full Text
SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 6-1 6. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Chapter 1, Executive Summary, contains Table 1-4, which summarizes the impacts, mitigation measures, and levels of significance before and after mitigation. While mitigation measures would reduce the level of impact, the following impacts would remain significant, unavoidable, and adverse after mitigation measures are applied. Air Quality Impact 5.2-1 Implementation of Mitigation Measures 2-1 through 2-4 would reduce construction emissions associated with new development projects in the Platinum Triangle. However, due to the magnitude of construction activities that could take place with build-out of the Proposed Project, emissions of Carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX), volatile organic compounds (VOC), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), and fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5) would continue to exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) regional construction regional emissions thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB). As a result, Impact 5.2-1 would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.2-2 Implementation of Mitigation Measures 2-4 through 2-6 would reduce operational phase emissions of the project. However, due to the magnitude of new air pollutant emissions sources that could result with build- out of the Proposed Project, emissions would exceed the SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) nonattainment designations of the SoCAB. As a result, Impact 5.2-2 would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.2-3 Mitigation Measures 2-1 through 2-4 would reduce on-site construction emissions to the extent feasible. However, due to the magnitude of the construction grading activities, the probability that multiple construction activities could occur at the same time, and the proximity of existing and future sensitive receptors within the Platinum Triangle, construction emissions may exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds. As a result, Impact 5.2-3 would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.2-5 Placement of sensitive uses near major pollutant sources would result in significant air quality impacts from the exposure of persons to substantial concentrations of toxic air pollutant contaminants. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-7 and 2-8 would ensure that residences within the Platinum Triangle are not located in close proximity to major stationary sources of air pollution identified by California Air Resources Board (CARB). As a result, no significant impact would occur. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 2-7 would reduce the potential indoor health risk. While long-term maintenance associated with replacement of the minimum efficiency reporting value filters is not in the control of the developer for indoor air quality impacts, Mitigation Measure 2-7 would require the property manager (rentals) and homeowner’s ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Page 6-2 • The Planning Center August 2010 association (HOA) to require homeowners to replace filters to reduce health risk associated with diesel particulates from being located within 500 feet of Interstate 5 and State Route 57. As a result, implementation of Mitigation Measures 2-7 and 2-8 would ensure that residents within the Platinum Triangle would not be exposed to levels of toxic air contaminants that exceed the ambient concentrations in the project vicinity, which are 931 to 1,086 in a million in the Platinum Triangle area (SCAQMD 2009). While Mitigation Measure 2-9 would reduce the potential outdoor health risk for parks within close proximity to the freeway, development projects may include outdoor private recreational areas within the CARB- recommended distance of 500 feet. Therefore, placement of private outdoor recreational areas would expose people to elevated levels of toxic air contaminants that exceed the ambient concentrations in the project vicinity, which are 931 to 1,086 a million in the Platinum Triangle (SCAQMD 2008), and impacts would be potentially significant. Impact 5.2-5 would be significant and unavoidable. Land Use Impact 5.4-2 No mitigation measures are available to reduce significant impacts to operation of the Southern California Gas Company’s microwave tower. The A-Town Metro project north of the microwave tower was approved on October 25, 2005, and is not a part of the current project actions to increase the intensity in the Platinum Triangle. Unless the property containing the microwave tower is redeveloped with a future mixed use and the tower is relocated, high-rise residential towers north of the microwave tower will conflict with the tower’s operation and this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Noise Impact 5.5-1 Mitigation Measure 5-1 will reduce impacts related traffic noise increases to the extent feasible. However, some areas may experience noise levels in exceedance of the City’s noise ordinance prior to implementation of roadway improvements and associated noise attenuation. Consequently, Impact 5.5-1 would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.5-3 Mitigation Measures 5-2 through 5-4 would reduce exterior noise levels at noise-sensitive exterior areas from roadway source noise, railroad noise, and from stadium events. However, the exterior noise environment may still exceed the goals for noise compatibility established by the City and would require evaluation of individual project compatibility with the exterior noise environment on a case-by-case basis. Consequently, Impact 5.5-3 would remain significant and unavoidable. Impact 5.5-5 Mitigation Measure 5-5 would reduce vibration impacts from pile driving, but would not eliminate vibration generated by heavy construction equipment operating within close proximity to existing or proposed units within the Platinum Triangle. Therefore, Impact 5.5-5 would remain significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts SEIR No. 339 City of Anaheim• Page 6-3 Impact 5.5-7 Mitigation Measures 5-7 through 5-10 would reduce noise levels from construction activities to the extent feasible. Construction noise impacts would be temporary as they would only occur when construction activities are occurring and would cease by evening. However, due to the proximity of occupied units within the Platinum Triangle to construction activities and potential overlap in the construction schedule from individual development projects constructed within the Platinum Triangle, Impact 5.5-7 would remain significant and unavoidable. Transportation and Traffic Impact 5.9-1 Implementation of Mitigation Measure 9-1 through 9-17 provides means to implement traffic improvements to reduce impacted intersections and arterial segments level of service to a less than significant level. However, although recommended, not all identified improvements are feasible. Where the primary responsibility for approving and/or completing certain improvements located outside of Anaheim lies with agencies other than the City of Anaheim such as the City of Orange and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), recommended measures may not be implemented for reasons beyond the City’s control. The City of Anaheim cannot undertake or require improvements outside of Anaheim’s jurisdiction and the City cannot construct improvements in the Caltrans’s right-of-way without Caltrans approval. Should that occur, the project’s traffic impact would remain significant. Recommended improvements on the following City of Anaheim intersections are not feasible and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. 1) Intersection I-1: Euclid Street/Katella Avenue 2) Intersection I-5: Disneyland Drive/Ball Road 3) Intersection I-6: Disneyland Drive/West Street/Katella Avenue 4) Intersection I-8: Harbor Boulevard/Ball Road 5) Intersection I-23: Anaheim Boulevard/Haster Street/Katella Avenue 6) Intersection I-49: State College Boulevard/Katella Avenue 7) Intersection I-53: State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue Recommended improvements on the following City of Orange intersections are not feasible because the City of Anaheim does not have jurisdiction over the implementation of these improvements; and, therefore, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. 8) Intersection I-53: State College Boulevard/Orangewood Avenue (shared intersection between Anaheim and Orange) 9) Intersection I-57: State College Boulevard/The City Drive/Chapman Avenue 10) Intersection I-71: Orangewood Avenue/SR-57 Southbound Ramps 11) Intersection I-80: Main Street/Collins Avenue 12) Intersection I-87: Glassell Street/Katella Avenue 13) Intersection I-102: The City Drive/Garden Grove Boulevard 14) Intersection I-98: SR-22 Westbound Ramps at Metropolitan Drive The following six arterial segments within the City of Orange are identified as deficient and are located within corridors that are built out and have right-of-way constraints include existing businesses, extensive landscaping, and in the case of Struck Avenue, several homes. The City of Orange has no plans to widen the ---PAGE BREAK--- 6. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Page 6-4 • The Planning Center August 2010 identified segments within the foreseeable future but should the City of Orange decide to implement improvements along these corridors, the City of Anaheim will need to contribute a fair-share. The City of Anaheim will continue to work with the City of Orange to develop the most appropriate strategy toward improving the locations impacted by the Proposed Project. 15) Arterial Segment A-15: Ball Road from SR-57 Freeway to Main Street 16) Arterial Segment A-27: Collins Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street 17) Arterial Segment A-28: Collins Avenue from Batavia Street to Glassell Street 18) Arterial Segment A-32: Eckhoff Street to Orangewood Avenue to Collins Avenue 19) Arterial Segment A-62: Katella Avenue from Main Street to Batavia Street 20) Arterial Segment A-91: Struck Avenue from Katella Avenue to Main Street Impact 5.9-2 Since the major freeway facilities within the study area, I-5, SR-22, and SR-57 have reached their design capacity or will have reached it by 2030 and the required physical improvements are largely the result of background regional traffic, consultation between the City of Anaheim and Caltrans will be necessary to reach consensus on any potential operational improvement measures. State highway facilities within the study area are not within the jurisdiction of the City of Anaheim. Improvements to State Highway Systems are deemed to be matters of federal, State, regional, and local concern and are planned, funded, and constructed by the State of California through a legislative and political process involving the State Legislature; the California Transportation Commission; the California Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency; Caltrans; and OCTA. Therefore, impacts to Caltrans facilities would remain significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact 5.11-1 As described in Impact 5.11-1, build-out of the project would be consistent with the goals of the Scoping Plan and best management practices identified for development project to reduce VMT through integrating land use and transportation and would achieve GHG reductions consistent with the 30 percent reduction associated with CARB’s Scoping Plan. In addition, the mitigation measures identified in Section 5.11.7 would reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the extent feasible. However, as shown in Table 5.11-6, implementation of the project would generate a substantial increase (463,371 MTons or 243 percent) in GHG emissions from existing conditions. Therefore, while the project would be consistent with GHG reduction goals of the Scoping Plan, GHG emissions generated by the project would be significant and unavoidable.