Reso PC15-01 PC Reso (3051 ) to Adopt Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration - La Palma

Browse Search

3.0 Environmental Impact Checklist control measures,land use and local impact measures, and energy and climate measures to be implemented throughout the region to achieve state and federal standards. The CAP is based on regional population,housing, and employment projects through 2020 compiled by the Association of Bay Area Government(ABAG).As such,a project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the regional air quality plan if it would be inconsistent with the regional growth assumptions, in terms of population, employment, or regional growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Growth projections for the City were based on the assumptions in the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report(EIR).As the build out of the project site would be consistent with the City's land use designation(see Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning) and the project's generated population has been accounted for in growth projections(see Section 3.13,Population and Housing), the resulting growth would be consistent with the projections used to develop the most current regional air quality plan for the Basin. The project would not interfere with population and VMT projections used to develop the 2010 CAP planning projections. The project would have no impact on implementation of the air quality plans. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. In June 2010,BAAQMD adopted air quality thresholds of significance for construction-related and operational-related activities at levels that BAAQMD believed air pollution emissions from a project would cause significant environmental impacts under CEQA.In March 2012, the Alameda County Superior Court issued a judgment finding that BAAQMD failed to comply with CEQA when it adopted the air quality thresholds of significance. BAAQMD appealed and the Court of Appeal of the State of California, First Appellate District,reversed the trial court's decision. The Court of Appeal's decision was appealed to the California Supreme Court and the matter is currently pending with the California Supreme Court.In light of the pending appeal,BAAQMD defers to the lead agency for a project to determine appropriate air quality thresholds.As the lead agency for the La Palma Subdivision Project, the City is using the May 2012 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines,the 2010 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines screening criteria, and the 1999 Thresholds of Significance to determine whether a project would result in a significant impact to air quality. The 2010 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines included screening criteria to provide lead agencies and project applicants with a conservative indication of whether the proposed project could result in potentially significant air quality impacts.These screening criteria are provided in the 2010 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines but are being revised as part of the 2012 Guidelines and are not yet available.For the purpose of this analysis, the City is using the 2010 screening criteria. If all of the screening criteria are met by a proposed project, then the lead agency or applicant would not need to perform a detailed air quality assessment of their project's air pollutant emissions.These screening levels are generally representative of new development on greenfield (previously undeveloped) sites. In addition,the screening criteria do not account for project design features, attributes, or local development requirements that could also result in lower emissions. For projects that are infill and proximate to transit and local services(like the La Palma Subdivision Project Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 23