Exhibit 7 — Santa Ana City Council, March 4, 2025

REQUEST FOR

COUNCIL ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:

APRIL 7, 2015
TITLE:

PUBLIC HEARING - RESOLUTION TO ADOPT AN

ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT STATEMENT/ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

REPORT FOR THE BRISTOL STREET

IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BETWEEN WARNER

AVENUE AND SAINT ANDREW PLACE
STRATEGIC PLAN NO. 6, 1, G)
1 Z
Z —

CITY MANAG

RECOMMENDED ACTION
CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY:

APPROVED
As Recommended
As Amended
Ordinanceon 1a' Reading
Ordinanceon2I Reading
Implementing Resolution
Set PublicHearingFor

CONTINUED TO

FILE NUMBER
Adopt a resolution approving an Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report pertaining to the Bristol Street Improvement Project between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place.

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 BristolStreetsegmentfrom WarnerAvenueto MemoryLanehas beena long -term priority project 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) ( EIS No. 89 - 01). A copy of the FEIS /EIR is attached ( Exhibit 1) and is also available for review in the Clerk of the Council office.

Since the adoption of the 1990 FEIS /EIR, there have been no substantial changes in the project scope. Minor design modifications for improvements between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place ( Exhibit 2) were considered, including addressing climate change issues. These modifications are identified in the Addendum to the FEIS / EIR ( Exhibit 3) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA). The design modifications to the project segment include the following:
75C - 1
Resolution Adopting an Addendum to the FEIR /FEIS for the Bristol Street Improvements ( Warner to Saint Andrew)
April 7, 2015

Page 2 of 2 ends

The right -of -way (ROW) width would be increasedfrom 120feet to 128feet.

The 15- foot -wide parkway would be reduced to 6 feet in width.

The 10- foot - wide sidewalk would be reduced to 8 feet in width.

The Bristol Street centerline between Saint Anne Place and Saint Andrew Place would be shifted an additional four feet to the west. The Bristol Street centerline would remain unmodified north of Saint Andrew Place.

The resolution approving the Addendum to the FEIS /EIR ( Exhibit 4) is needed to allow expenditure of federal grant funding for right -of -way acquisition and construction of the project.

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution in accordance with the CEQA requirements.

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
Pursuant to Section 15164(d) of the California Environmental Quality Act, City Council shall consider adopting a resolution approving the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Statement / Environmental Impact Report.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action
i- rec ousavipour
Exec ive Director
Public Works Agency

FM /EWG / ML
Exhibit: 1. Bristol Street FEIS / EIR ( attached CD)

2. Location Map

3. Addendum to the FEIS / EIR

4. Resolution
75C - 2
Exhibit 1
Located on the city' s website:
http: // santaana. granicus . com / GeneratedAgendaViewer. php ? view id =2 &event id =350 A. Bristol Street Improvements and Widening Environmental Impact Study— Environmental Impact Review
B. Bristol Street Improvements and Widening Technical Studies C. Bristol Street Improvements and Widening Traffic Study D. Bristol Street Improvements and Widening Historical Property Survey Report E. Bristol Street Improvements and Widening Relocation Impact Study 75C - 3
75C - 4

ST ANDREWPL

CARLTON PL CARLTON PL

GLENWOODPL GLENWOODPL
CAMDENP `
1 CAMDENPLI 1
I

ST AN PL

T ANNE PL
I

ST GERTRUDEPL
r-
i

ST GERTRUDE PL
J
J
L- 2

WARNERAV (DELHIRD)
1 r- ._ (

SCALE NTS)
PROJECT AREA EXHIBIT 2
RESOLUTION TO ADOPT ADDENDUM.,
TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT $ t
savrA ANA STATEMENT / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
CITY COUNCIL REPORT FOR THE BRISTOL STREET ifP WA AGENDA DATE: IMPROVEMENTS AND WIDENING PROJECT — u APRIL7, 2015 BETWEEN WARNER AVENUE ANDPU9L C woaks a EN.

SAINT ANDREW PLACE. PAGE 1 of 1
75C - 5
75C - 6
August 2014

CITY OF SANTA ANA
Bristol Street Widening Project
Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV)
Environmental Impact Report Addendum
PROJECT NUMBER;
733667
PRO ECTCONTACT,.

CourtMorganEMAIL: court morgar @powerang. mm
PHONE: 949-436 -3453
POWERs
ENGINEERS Exhibit 3
75C - 7

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAve to SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) Environmental Impact Report Addendum
PREPARED FOR: CITY OF SANTA ANA
PREPARED BY. COURTMORGAN
714- 507 - 2764
CO URT. MOR GAN @POWERENG. COM
75C - 8

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Wldeninq Prolect Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. 0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. .............................. 1

1. 1 PURPOSE OF AN ADDENDUM .............................................................................. 2

1. 2 PROJECT LOCATION ............................................................................................ 4

1.1.1 Existing Land Uses ........................................................................................................ 4

1. 3 PROJECT BACK GROUND ................................................................................... 10

1. 3. 1 Approved 1990 Final EM/ EIS ...................................................................................... 10

1. 3. 2 Adopted Transportation Improvement Program ........................................................... 10

1. 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................... 11

1.4.1 Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV Project Area ........................................................... 11

1.4.2 Property Acquisition ..................................................................................................... 11

1.4. 3 Changes as Compared to the Approved Project ............................................................ 15

1.4. 4 Construction Timeframe ............................................................................................... 16

1. 5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS .................................................................................. 16

2. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECK LIST ................................................................... 19

2. 1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 19

3. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .......................................................... 21

3. 1 AESTHETICS ........................................................................................................ 21

3. 2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................ 22

3. 3 AIR QUALITY .................................................................................................... 23

3. 4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................................................. 32

3. 5 CULTURAL RESOURCES .................................................................................... 33

3. 6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ....................................................................................... 34

3. 7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ......................................................................... 36

3. 8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ........................................................ 37

3. 9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ................................................................ 39

3. 10 LAND USE AND PLANNING ............................................................................... 43

3. 11 MINERAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................ 43

3. 12 NOISE .................................................................................................................. 44

3. 13 POPULATION AND HOUSING ............................................................................. 49

3. 14 PUBLIC SERVICES ............................................................................................. 50

3. 15 RECREATION .................................................................................................... 51

3. 16 TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC ............................................................................. 51

3. 17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ................................................................... 53

3. 18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ....................................................... 54 ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU i
75C - 9

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV)

4. 0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... ............................. 56

FIGURES
FIGURE 1 REGIONAL LOCATION ..................................................................................... ............................... 7 FIGURE 2 PROJECT LOCATION ........................................................................................ ............................... 8 FIGURE 3 EXISTING LAND USES FROM 1990 FINAL EIS/ EIR ......................................... ............................... 9 FIGURE 4 PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS ............................................................................ ............................... 14 FIGURE 5 PROPOSED PROJECT LAYOUT ....................................................................... ............................... 17 FIGURE 6 PROPOSED LANE GEOMETRICS - 1990 FINAL EIS/ EIR ................................ ............................... 18 FIGURE 7A NOISE MONITORING AND MODELING LOCATIONS ................................... ............................... 46 FIGURE 7B NOISE MONITORING AND MODELING LOCATIONS ................................... ............................... 47 TABLES
TABLE 1 EXISTING LAND USES ...................................................................................... .............................. 4 TABLE 2 PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS ............................................................................ ............................... 12 TABLE 3 PROJECT RELATED CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS ........................................... ............................... 25 TABLE 4 YEAR 2015 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECTAIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS ..... ............................... 27 TABLE 5 YEAR 2035 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS ..... ............................... 28 TABLE LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCETHRESHOLDSANALYSIS FOR CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES .............. 30 TABLE 7 CO HOTSPOT ANALYSIS ( PPM) ..................................................................... ............................... 31 TABLE 8 LOCAL SCHOOLS WITHIN THE PHASE IV PROJECTAREA ............................. ............................... 38

APPENDIX A
ANA 305 - 194 (PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 10

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street WideningProject WarnerAve to SaintAndrew Place (Phase IV)

1. 0 INTRODUCTION
This Addendum has beenprepared in accordancewith the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA), as amended, to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the proposed changes to the widening of Bristol Street, from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane as proposed in the Project Final Environmental hnpact Statement / Environmental Impact Report ( FEIS / EIR) approved in 1990 ( FHWA - CA- EIS- 89 -01- F; SCH No. 87071509).

This Addendum focuses on the segment of Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place Phase IV, or Project) and is limited to the proposed improvements to this segment. This Addendum provides an assessment of potential environmental impacts associated with minor design modifications and the issueof climate changewhich was not addressedin the previously preparedand certified FEIS /EIR.

Design modifications to the Project, since approval of the 1990 FEIS / EIR, that are addressed in this Addendum include the following:

TheproposedProjectincreasesthetotal right -of -way width from 120feetto 128feet. Theproposed Project right- of-way cross- section would maintain a curb -to -curb width of 100 feet, would accommodate a 7 -foot wide bike lane on each side of the roadway, and would not affect the number or width of vehicular travel lanes as compared to the right -of -way cross - section addressed in the 1990 FEIS/EIR. However, the proposedProject right -of -way cross section, ascomparedto the right- of-way crosssectionaddressedin the 1990FEIS /EIR, would reducethewidth of the sidewalksfrom 10 to 8 feet and also accommodate a 6 -foot wide parkway on each side of Bristol Street to separate pedestrian and vehicular travel; a parkway was not included as part of the roadway cross section addressedin the 1990FEIS /EIR. Acquisition of property resulting from the proposed Project right - of -way is accountedfor in this analysis.

The centerline alignment has been shifted to the west starting at St. Gertrude instead of starting at Glenwood Place with the addition of 4 -feat to the original 20 -foot shift. The street centerline then shifted back 4 -feet to the east at St. Andrew in order to match the existing centerline north of St.

Andrew. By shifting the centerline at St. Gertrude, the PhaseIV Project saved eight parcels from full take by reducing these parcels to partial acquisitions.

A bus turnout would be located at the Warner Avenue.

Change right -of -way requirement from full take to partial take of the following single - family residential parcels: 015- 215 - 10 ( 150 square feet), 015- 215 - 11 ( 50 square feet), 015- 214 - 10 ( 50 square feet), 015- 234 - 10 ( 50 square feet), 015- 233 - 11 ( 50 square feet), 015- 233 - 10 ( 50 square Feet), 015- 232 - 11 ( 50 square feet), and ( 015- 232 - 10 ( 50 square feet).

Change right -of -way requirement from full take to partial take of Parcel 408- 336 -17 (3,466 square feet).

Land use for the current Project has been changed compared to the 1990 FEIS. The following parcels have been changed from Park to Park with Commercial Option: 015- 194 - 38 and 015 - 194-

39. Preceding project phase inclusive of the following parcel which is no longer included in the Phase IV Project right -of -way requirements: 015- 194 -40.

It should be noted that the 1990 FEIS and 2013 National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA) Reevaluation URS Corporation) provided comprehensive noise barriers at all easterly parcel boundaries currently fronting the eastside of Bristol Streetbetween Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place and comprehensive noise barriers at all westerly parcel boundariescurrently fronting the west side of Bristol Streetbetween ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 11

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street WideningProject WarnerAve to Saint AndrewPlace (Phase IV) West Saint Gertrude Place and Saint Andrew Place. Using the California Department of Transportation's Caltrans) May 2011Traffic NoiseAnalysisProtocol, thefollowing noisebarriers (NB) weredeterminedto be reasonable: NB -4, NB -5, NB - 6, NB -7, NB - 8, NB - 9, NB - 10, and NB - 11. These noise barriers are generallyequivalentto the recommendednoisebarriersshownin the 1990FEIS and2013 Reevaluation.

However, barriers NB - 6, NB - 7, NB - 8, and NB - 9 would need to be shifted to the west of the receivers parcels) that are no longer being acquired. The modifications and otherrefinements to the project would not createanyadditionalimpactsthanwhatwasidentifiedin the2013NEPAReevaluation; thus, therewouldbe no changes or additions to the avoidance, minimization, and/ or mitigation measures.

Furthermore, asclimatechangeis arelatively newareaof discussion, thetopic wasnot discussedin theAir Quality sectionof the previously approvedFEIS /EIR. As such, this Addendumanalyzesthe effects of climate change associated with the construction and operation of the Project.

This Addendumto thepreviouslycertified1990Final EIS /EIR hasbeenpreparedbecauseproject - related modifications to the Bristol Street alignment do not trigger the need for further environmental analysis in a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR under the requirements of CEQA or CEQA Guidelines ( refer to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15164 and 15167).

1. 1 Purpose of an Addendum
Under CEQA, when an EIR has been certified for a project, no Subsequent FIR may be required for that project unless the lead agency determines, basedupon substantialevidence, that one or more specified circumstanceshasoccurred. Only if oneor moreof thefollowing circumstancesarisesis a SubsequentFIR required:
1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revision of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increasein the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revision of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental increasein the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, showsanyof the following:

A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; B) Significanteffectspreviouslyexaminedwill besubstantiallymoreseverethanshownin the previous EIR;
C) Mitigation measuresor alternativespreviously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, andwould substantiallyreduceoneor moresignificant effectsof the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or D) Mitigation measuresor alternativeswhich are considerablydifferent from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. ( CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[ a])
A Supplementto anFIR ( or SupplementalEIR), which is narrower in scopethan a SubsequentEIR, may be preparedif any of the abovecriteriaapply, but "[o]nly minor changesor additionswouldbe necessaryto makethepreviousEIR adequatelyapplyto theprojectin thechangedsituation" (CEQAGuidelinesSection 15163[ a]). In the absence of the need to prepare either a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR, an Addendum maybeprepared. Section15164states:

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 12

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) a) The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changesor additions are necessarybut none of the conditions describedin Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequentFIR have occurred. b) An addendumto an adoptednegative declaration may be preparedif only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
d) The decision making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on theproject.
e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendumto an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15164)
This Addendum to the previously certified Final EIS/EIR for the Approved Project has been prepared becausethe evaluation of the proposedmodifications doesnot result in any of the circumstancesrequiring a Subsequent or Supplemental EIS/ EIR. As shown in this Addendum, although the proposed modifications would resultin developmentthatdiffers from thatin the 1990FinalEIS /EIR, they donot triggertheneedfor preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR under the criteria listed in Sections 15162( a) and 15163( a). Sections 2 and 3 of this Addendum demonstrate that no substantial changes are proposed in the approved project or have occurred in the area of the Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project located betweenWarner Avenue and St. Andrew Placethat will require major revisions to the previously certified 1990 Final EIS /EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Specifically, the proposedmodifications do not result in new or substantially greater significant impacts because the scale and nature of the development proposedaresufficiently similar to that analyzedin the 1990Final EIS/EIR that the impactsof the proposed modifications are within the levels and types of environmental impacts disclosed in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Additionally, no substantial changes in circumstances under Section 15162(a)(2) have occurred since the certification of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR for the approved project that would implicate new significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of significant impacts previously identified, since the background environmental conditions have not significantly changed since that time. The City of Santa Ana hasreceivedno informationindicatingtherehasbeena substantialchangein any circumstancesthat would result in a new or substantially greater significant impact.

Furthermore, no new information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR preparation, has been revealed that shows new or substantially greater significant impacts will result ( see CEQA Guidelines Section 15162( a)( 3)). In addition, there are no new or different Mitigation Measures or Alternatives that would substantially reduce one or more significant impacts of the approvedproject but that arenot adopted. The proposedmodifications do not identify or require adoption of any further Mitigation Measures or Alternatives beyond those provided in the certified 1990 Final EIS/EIR for the approvedproject, sinceadditionalMitigation Measuresareeithernot necessaryor not feasible, and the Alternatives analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR representa reasonablerange as requestedby CEQA see CEQA Guidelines Section 15162( a)( 3)).

The Addendum relies on the certified 1990 Final EIS/ EIR and the related administrative record, in addition to the additional documentation included to support the Addendum, including the appendices. The Addendum is to be included or attached to the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR and is not to be considered as an independent or separate document.

As this Addendum doesnot identify new or substantially greater significant impacts, circulation for public review and commentis not necessarypursuantto CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(c). However, the City ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 3
75C - 13

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) Council will consider and adopt or reject this Addendum at a public meeting prior to the approval of the proposed Bristol Street Widening PhaseIV project (refer to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(4)). The findings of the City Council in its resolution of adoption of this Addendum, if adopted, will reflect this Addendum which provides the basis and substantial evidence for the decision not to prepare a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR ( refer to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164( e)).

1. 2 Project Location
The project site is located on a segment of Bristol Street between Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place in the City of SantaAna. The City of SantaAna, locatedwithin the Countyof Orange, is surroundedby the Cities of Tustin, Orange, CostaMesa, FountainValley, and GardenGrove. The proposedproject site is locatedapproximately 1.5 miles north of the SanDiego Freeway (I -405) and approximatelythreemiles south of State Route 22 ( SR -22). Refer to Figure 1 and Figure 2 for the regional map and project location map with proposed roadway alignment and widening.

1. 1. 1 Existing Land Uses
The project areaand surroundingvicinity is locatedwithin a fully urbanizedareaof the City. The existing landusesalongtheprojectcorridorconsistof commercialandsingle - family residentialdevelopments. There are no outdoor activities associated with the commercial developments in the project area. The existing single - family residencesconsist of single -story homes of varying sizes, and include outdoor areas of frequent human use ( i. e., rear and side yards).

According to the current City of SantaAna General Plan, land use designationfor the affected parcels fronting Bristol Streetwithin the vicinity of the Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV project area and existing land uses are summarized in the Table 1 Existing Land Uses.

The majority of surroundingareasbeyondthe project site are similar to the developmenttypology along Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV which includes single family residences, multi - family residencesand various commercial and retail facilities. Figure 3 ( Existing Land Uses from the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR]), illustrates the existing land usesidentified for Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV aspart of the 1990Final EIS /EIR. It shouldbe notedthat while thePhaseIV projectareastretchesalongBristol Streetfrom Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place, Bristol Street at Edinger Avenue is also included aspart of the project study area however, Bristol Street from Saint Andrew to Edinger has already been widened and is not a part of Phase IV. The locations of the full or partial acquisitions are shown on Figure 4.

TABLE 1 EXISTING LAND USES
ANA 305 -194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 14
APN ADDRESS GENERALPLANZONING EXISTINGLAND U5EDESIGNATION 015- 191 -11 1235 W Saint OS SP1 SingleFamilyResidentialGertrude PI 015 - 194 -17 2101 S Bristol St OS SP1 Commercial (Mortgage Office) 015 - 194 -20 2115 S Bristol St OS SP1 Commercial ( Lawnmower/ Equipment Repair 015 - 194 -21 2119 S Bristol St OS SP1 Parking
015 - 194 -22 2123 S Bristol St OS SP1 Commercial (Palm /TarotReadingin Single FamilyResidential)
015 - 194 -23 2201 S Bristol St OS SP1 SingleFamilyResidential 015 - 194 -24 2205 S Bristol St OS SP1 SingleFamilyResidential ANA 305 -194 ( PER02) USA ( AUGUST2014) 133867YU
75C -14

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 015- 194-25
algmg n-gl
MY
2209 S Bristol St Os SPI
IMP
Commercial ( Dentist)
015- 194-28 2223 S Bristol St PIC Spi Commercial ( Real Estate Office) 015- 194-29 2227 S Bristol St PIC Spi Commercial ( Costume Rental) 015- 194-36 2231 S Bristol St PIC Spi Commercial ( Dentist) 015- 194-38 2215 S Bristol St PIC Spi Commercial (Ambulance Services) 015- 194- 39 2219 S Bristol St PIC SPI Commercial ( Ambulance Services) 015- 194-41 2109 S Bristol St OS Spi Commercial ( Dentist) 015- 214- 10 1241 Camden P1 OS Spi SingleFamilyResidential 015- 215- 10 1241 Saint Anne P1 OS SPI SingleFamilyResidential 015-215- 11 1242 Camden PI Os Spi SingleFamilyResidential 015- 216- 01 1242 Saint Anne PI OS SPI SingleFamilyResidential 015- 232- 10 1242 W Saint AndrE
i OS Spi SingleFamilyResidential
015- 232- 11 1241 Carlton PI OS Spi SingleFamilyResidential 015- 233-10 1242 Carlton PI OS Spi SingleFamilyResidential 015- 233- 11 1241 W Glenwood I OS SIDI SingleFamilyResidential 015- 234- 10 1242 W Glenwood I OS SPI SingleFamilyResidential 408- 332- 01 1302 W Saint AndrE
pi OS SPI SingleFamilyResidential
408-332-17 1305 W Carlton PI LR7 R2 SingleFamilyResidential 408- 332- 18 1301 W Carlton PI OS SPI SingleFamilyResidential 408- 333-01 1302 W Carlton PI OS SPI SingleFamilyResidential 408- 333- 02 1306 W Carlton PI LR7 R2 SingleFamilyResidential 408- 333- 18 1301 W Glenwood I OS Spi SingleFamilyResidential 408- 334- 01 2034 S Bristol St OS Spi SingleFamilyResidential 408- 334- 17 1305 W Camden PI LR7 R2 SingleFamilyResidential 408- 334- 18 1301 W Camden PI OS Spi SingleFamilyResidential 408- 335- 01 1302 W Camden PI OS Spi SingleFamilyResidential 408- 335- 02 1306 W Camden PI LR7 R2 SingleFamilyResidential 408- 335- 17 1305 W Saint Anne LR7 R2 SingleFamilyResidential 408- 335- 18 1301 W Saint Anne OS Spi SingleFamilyResidential ANA 305- 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 15

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street WideningProject WarnerAve to SaintAndrew Place (Phase IV) rrr' `
La"} 5" k_ ai -.: -S e' i < j -., Ya i. '.'" - ;^ i' C a.2 Fyt$ 4, N' i' I' * a s of
408- 336 -01 1302 W Saint Anne OS SP1 SingleFamilyResidential 408 - 336 -02 1306 W Saint Anne LR7 R2 SingleFamilyResidential 408- 336 -17 2040 S Bristol St LR7 /OS R2 /SP1 Vacant
408 - 471 -01 2102 S Bristol St GC C2 /SP1 Commercial ( Restaurant) 408- 471 -05 2222 S Bristol St GC C2 /SP1 Commercial (StripMall) 408- 471 -06 2240 S Bristol St GC C21SP1 Commercial ( Florist) 408 - 471 -17 2130 S Bristol St GC C2 /SP1 Commercial (ShoppingPlaza) Notes:

GeneralPlanDesignations: GC = GeneralCommercial, LR7 = LowDensityResidential, OS = OpenSpace, PIC = ParkwithCommercialZoning Designations: SP1= BristolStreetCorridorSpecificPlan, R1= SingleFamilyResidential, R2 = Two-FamilyResidential, C2 = GeneralCommercial Parcel015- 194 -40locatedat2235S BristolStwas notincludedinthislistasitwas acquiredbytheCityof SantaAnaaspartof a separatepreceding project.

AN 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 16
FIGURE 1 REGIONAL LOCATION
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) 75C - 17
KERN' CU.

OREGON IDAHO
F
d
s
V. L9master ' ate
5 NEVADA
UTAH'.
a
r. F
Imdale AdeldnI CALIFORNIA
i, RIZON
aKy S
Oygapn
LEGEND

PROJECT LOCATION

PACIFIC OCEAN
F
1`
FIGURE 1

REGIONAL LOCATION
N

BRISTOL STREET WIDENING PROJECT
WARNERAVENUE TO ST. ANDREW PLACE
Miles ( PHASE IV)
0 5 10 15
75C - 18
FIGURE 2 PROJECT LOCATION
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) 75C - 19
PC1RkyitloaLy - i Ail Wypllhlsfit 1 I I dl iv ciifri r. I K GPii. i 55 wilw[ PP6t i It (
miljl
1RlrNiandSt l t
3 ie' 7 WWISlenaP,
p
i
i I,.

II, t
6 i
l
i. A }tJJ n
tt c
1--- I` i Hev Ny PI.
m l ifi m,
III
w t
ir
if Ell
if Il611 Si
i> p II i
I,
I
Lt I 91ddwd
Ii L
it s
ll
iWEld - f AVe h It ` q Il r nl I
Ld n zfl
i AVWHU}(
9p) wTe
w`li bar
n
k( no5ffi I. if
m
o wu, ifflsl
dV
st
r GartVm
e1lt' `
I it
Hirvaril5t Foil
n4
ln' l
z gJ NwTSo-rHY r + G
II—WAneIUtfitP,I - if -. it _ -
i! Is w
11U=
II
L
m
If
WHe1iVV li
if
i S s I,
w.
l
mI ilk l i ECxnIF
rot fI_
n
jc
i ti _ w
If
t 21 p L 1
3:
st
WH6'fevoRWnf. il . to
ifiPm)an a
t
Y9
p r t1
e., . r AVc
i , n Ldllo
1 AbnA, c j ll NIh3
y tt
i n 1 1
VC. i= Ave W Be! AV,
R1W 3t'ltlpt * 6lvtl I _
IIf, Av2 — qfuaR>r4 _ _ Ks
z cent R, itl
Santa Ana o K04 ,. ",
Costa Mesa
I i r ,. °•
i..

LEGEND FIGURE 2

PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS PROJECT LOCATION
N

BRISTOL STREET WIDENING PROJECT
WARNER AVENUE TO ST. ANDREW PLACE
Feel PHASE IV)
0 1,000 2,000
FOI IRCF ARCGI. S ONI INF. NATPF0 WORT D MAP ACOFRSFO Ni 75C - 20

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) FIGURE 3 EXISTING LAND USES FROM 1990 FINAL EIS / EIR
ANA 305494 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 21
tJQwaWN aw
M0 =
m
WQ WLU o 2uj
ww
D
o¢
U M ww 0
3AY pli V"
U) N wa
W w
VA V XpYOt am
UR NY.

VAV Yip X103
v p,Sy •,r+i' t + S
r
x >)q3 t a
1pplYli AW1X3Mtlt' 0.'e' lrTf' vi
y ++' MINOMV - It
pF
J li Mp11tlVp zUZO
q6
Ll O lv pO0MMi1t j
z
g
H
yuLLN , oa
WmuD r7 ?
NV— O
NWM Z Oz
wy
UO
iXNY ' lt
S
J ' W'llll
ll
eNMY is ° L°
z w?
w
tp tl1Yi0 ' Lt ° > a
r w
I
z
wa
Fo
C
yw
3AY Yt MYVM
rN
Um0
OKNm
75C - 22

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV)

1. 3 Project Background

1. 3. 1 Approved 1990 Final EIRIEIS
The City of SantaAna GeneralPlanhasdesignatedBristol StreetasaMajor Arterial Highwaytravelingin a north -southdirection. As aresult of significant growth andtraffic congestionon Bristol Avenue, the City, in the late 1980s, proposed to widen Bristol Streetfrom 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 waspreparedandapprovedby theCity of SantaAna andCaltransfor thewideningof Bristol Street in 1990. The 1990 project entailed a 3. 9 -mile segment of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue on the south to Memory Lane on the north. Due to significant costs associatedwith construction and availability of funding, the project was divided into several construction phases; Phase 1 from Warner Avenue north to First Street, Phase2 consisting of the widening and reconstruction of the bridge which crossesSantiagoCreels (northerly limits of the streetwideningproject), andPhase3betweenFirst StreetandMemoryLane.

The 1990 Final EIS / EIR document ( SCH No. 87071509) was approved on November 19, 1990. The 1990 Final EIS /EIR and associatedtechnical studies, incorporated herein by reference, documented the environmental impacts of widening Bristol Streetfrom Warner Avenue to Memory Lane in the City of Santa Ana. As statedin the 1990Final EIS/EIR, the purposeandgoalsof the Bristol StreetWidening project were to:
1) Provide sufficient roadway capacityto accommodatecurrentandfuture traffic demand. 2) Improve the performance and safety of the roadway for the benefit of themotoring 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 designthe roadwayin mannerconduciveto the provision of public transportation, namely bus service provided by the Orange County Transit District ( OCTD).

1. 3. 2 Adopted Transportation Improvement Program
The Approved Project is included as project number ORA125 in the regional emissions analysis conducted by Southern California Association of Governments ( SLAG) for the conforming 2013 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) adoptedby SCAG on September19, 2012 and approvedby FHWA on December 14, 2012. As provided in the FTIP, the Approved Project description reads as follows:

BRISTOL ST ( WARNER TO MEMORY LANE) WIDEN FROM 4 TO 6 LANES ( IMPV AT BRISTOL / WARNER ( ADD ATIEBISB THRULNS; WB RT TRNLN) AND BRISTOL / FIRST ( ADD

NBISB THR U INS, SBLFTIRTITRNINS
The Phase IV project is a component of the Approved Project. The Phase IV Project' s design concept and scopehave not changedsignificantly from what was analyzedin the RTIP and FTIP. This analysisfound that theplan and, therefore, the individual projectscontainedin theplan, areconforming projects, andwould have air quality impacts consistent with those identified in the state implementation plans ( SIPS) for achieving the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). FHWA determined the RTIP to conform to the SIP.

The Phase IV Project' s open to the public year is consistent with ( within the same regional emission analysis period as) the construction completion date identified in the FTIP and /or RTP. The FTIP gives priority to eligible Transportation Control Measures ( TCMs) identified in the SIP and provides sufficient funds to provide for their implementation. FHWA determined the TIP to conform to the SIP on December 2010.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 10 75C - 23

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAveto SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) The PhaseIV Project is also included in the 2013 TIP adoptedby SCAG on September6, 2012 and approvedby FHWA on December14, 2012.

1. 4 Project Description

1. 4. 1 Bristol Street Widening Phase IV Project Area
PhaseIV of the Bristol StreetWidening Project involves the widening of Bristol Street (betweenWarner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place) from 4 lanes to 6 lanes with a 150- foot -wide right -of -way cross section includinga 14 -foot wide raisedlandscapedmedian; three12- foot -wide throughtravel lanesin each direction; a 7 -foot wide Class1I bike laneon eachsideof theroadway; a 15 -foot wide parkway, and 10 -foot sidewalk with curb ramps for wheelchair accesspursuant to American with Disabilities Act of 1990 ( ADA) requirements on both sides of the roadway.

As Bristol Street approaches the intersections between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place, and between Warner Avenue and Glenwood Place, the landscaped center median would taper to accommodate right - tarn pockets and left - turn lanes in each direction. The landscaped center median would then continue north of theGlenwoodPlaceintersectionto matchthe existingraisedcentermedianapproximately380feet south of Edinger Avenue. The addition of the landscaped center median would improve safety by preventing left -tum access to /from Saint Gertrude Place, Saint Anne Place, Camden Place, and Carlton Place to the newlywidenedBristolStreet. (Note: theintersectionof BristolStreetandSaintAndrewPlacewouldbe convertedto a right -turn only intersectionin both directions.) Additionally, cul -de -sacswould be included on the west side of Bristol Street at Saint Anne Place, Camden Place, and Carlton Place to improve safety by preventingaccessto /fromthesestreetsto thenewlywidenedBristol Street. Thelocationof thePhaseIV Project is shown in Figure 1 and in Figure 2.

Streetsigns and utilities including electricpower lines, telephonepoles, and streetlighting would be relocatedtonewlocationswithin theprojectareaalongBristolStreet. Streetfurniture, includingthebenches andbusshelters, will beprovided atbusstoplocations.

Duringtheone -yearconstruction (approximatelymid -2016to mid- 2017), onelanein eachdirectionwould remainopenandexistingdrivewayaccessesalongBristol Streetwould beretainedat all rimes. Maximum excavationdepth would be three feet for roadway excavation and 10 feet for utility /drainage excavation.

Constructionequipmentwould be thoseconsistentwith othersimilar roadwaywideningprojectsandlikely would include excavators, loaders, backhoes, dump trucks, graders, pavers and rollers, and other construction trucks.

1. 4. 2 Property Acquisition
To accommodatethestreetwideningproposedby theBristol StreetWideningproject, a combinationof full and partial acquisition of right of way is required from a total of 43 residential and commercial parcels frontingBristolStreetfromWarnerAvenuetoSaintAndrewPlace (refertoFigure4 [PropertyAcquisitions] for the locations of affectedproperties). Table 2 includesa listing of propertiesaffected andthe disposition of acquisition requirements.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 24

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) TABLE 2 PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 12 75C - 25
015 - 191 -11 1235 W. Saint Gertrude Place Single - FamilyResidential Full 6,493 015 - 194 -17 2101 S. Bristol Street Mortgage Full 5,389 015 - 194 -20 2115 S. Bristol Street Lawnmower/ Equipment Repair Full 5,881 015 - 194 -21 2119 S. Bristol Street Parking Full 6,000 015 - 194 -22 2123 S Bristol Street Palm /TarotReadingin Single- FamilyResidential
Full 6, 720
015 - 194 -23 2201 S. Bristol Street Single - FamilyResidential Full 6, 720 015 - 194 -24 2205 S. Bristol Street Single - FamilyResidential Full 6,600 015 - 194 -25 2209S. Bristol Street Dental Office Full 5,880 015 - 194 -28 2223 S. Bristol Street Real Estate Office Full 6, 120 015 - 194 -29 2227 S. Bristol Street Costume Rental Full 6,120 015 - 194 -36 2231 S. Bristol Street Dental Office Full 5,940 015 - 194 -38 2215 S. Bristol Street Ambulance Services Full 5,760 015 - 194 -39 2219 S. Bristol Street Ambulance Services Full 5,640 015 - 194 -41 2109 S. Bristol Street Dental Office Full 11,402 015 - 214 -10 RD 1241 Camden Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 53 015 - 215 -10 RD 1241 Saint Anne Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 209 015- 215 -11 RD 1242 Camden Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 48 015 - 216 -01 1242 Saint Anne Place Single - FamilyResidential Full 6,556 015 - 232 -10 RD 1242 W. Saint Andrew Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 50 015 - 232 -11 RD 1241 Carlton Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 52 015 - 233 -10 RD 1242 Carlton Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 46 015 - 233 -11 RD 1241 W. Glenwood Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 51 015 - 234 -10 RD 1242 W. Glenwood Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 50 408 - 332 -01 1302 W. Saint Andrew Place Single - FamilyResidential Full 8,262 408 - 332 -17 1305 W. Carlton Place Single- FamilyResidential Partial 450 408 - 332 -18 1301 W. Carlton Place Single- FamilyResidential Full 8,286 408 - 333 -01 1302 W. Carlton Place Single - FamilyResidential Full 8,286 408 - 333 -02 1306 W. Carlton Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 450 ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867YU 12
75C -25

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street WideningProject WarnerAve to SaintAndrew Place (Phase IV) 4g
iE
ssYe
1 T4sLNJ U
YM
lt$
408- 333 -18 1301 W. Glenwood Place Single - FamilyResidential Full 8,262 408 - 334 -01 2034 S. Bristol Street Single - FamilyResidential Full 7,531 408 - 334 -17 1305 W. Camden Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 150 408 - 334 -18 1301 W. Camden Place Single - FamilyResidential Full 7,012 408- 335 -01 1302 W. Camden Place Single - FamilyResidential Full 7,009 408- 335 -02 1306 W. Camden Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 150 408- 335 -17 1305 W. Saint Anne Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 150 408 - 335 -18 1301 W. Saint Anne Place Single - FamilyResidential Full 7,012 408- 336 -01 1302 W. Saint Anne Place Single - FamilyResidential Full 7,012 408- 336 -02 1306 W. Saint Anne Place Single - FamilyResidential Partial 150 408 - 336 -17 RD 2040 S. Bristol Street Vacant Partial 3,466 408 - 471 -01 2102 S. Bristol Street Restaurant Full 11,079 408 - 471 -05 2222 S. Bristol Street StripMall Partial 1,415 408 - 471 -06 2240 S. Bristol Street Florist Full 21, 169 408 - 471 -17 2130 S. Bristol Street ShoppingPlaza Partial 17,076 Source: POWER Engineers, 2014.

NOTES
RD: Change in parcel boundaries or parcel impact subsequent to the 1990 FEIS and 2013 Reevaluation.

No Change.

The acquisitionof property, as describedherein, would comply with policiespursuantto the Uniform RelocationAssistanceandReal PropertyAcquisition Policies Act of 1970as implementedby the City of Santa Ana.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 26
13 FIGURE 4 PROPERTY ACQUISITIONS
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) 75C - 27
14 w Fc 9' u• a R i p d " i . Fd

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Proiect Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV)

1. 4. 3 Changes as Compared to the Approved Project
It shouldbe notedthat project phasinghasbeenrevised from the original threephasesidentified in thel990 Final EIS /EIR. Constructionphasingof theentire project segmenthasbeenfurther subdividedasfollows:

St. Andrew Place to McFadden Avenue ( Constructed in 2002) Elm Street to Memory Lane ( Constructed in 2003)
Pine Streetto 3`dStreet (Constructedin 2009)
Phase I: McFadden Avenue to Pine Street ( Constructed in 2011)' PhaseIL• 3`dStreetto Civic CenterDrive (Constructionto be completedin 2014) Phase IIIA: Civic Center Drive to Washington Avenue
Phase IIIB: Washington Avenue to 17 "' Street
Phase IV: Warner Avenue to St. Andrew Place
PhaseV: 17`1iStreetto Elm Street
The proposed street widening design configuration for the current Phase IV segment differs from the original configuration of the 1990 Final EIS / EIR, as follows:

The proposedProjectincreasesthetotal right -of -way width from 120feet to 128feet. The proposed Project right -of -way cross - section would maintain a curb -to -curb width of 100 feet, would accommodatea 7 -foot wide bike laneon eachsideof theroadway, andwould not affect thenumber or width of vehicular travel lanes as compared to the right -of -way cross - section addressedin the 1990 FEIS /EIR. However, the proposed Project right -of -way cross section, ascompared to the right - of -way crosssectionaddressedin the 1990FEIS /EIR, would reducethewidth of thesidewalksfrom 10to 8 feet andalso accommodatea 6 -foot wide parkway on eachside of Bristol Streetto separate pedestrianand vehicular travel; a parkway was not included aspart of the roadway cross section addressedin the 1990 FEIS /EIR. Acquisition of property resulting from the proposedProject right - of -way is accountedfor in this analysis.

The centerline alignment hasbeen shifted to the west starting at St. Gertrude instead of starting at Glenwood Place with the addition of 4 -feet to the original 20 -foot shift. The street centerline then shiftedback 4 -feet to the eastat St. Andrew in order to match the existing centerlinenorth of St.

Andrew. By shifting thecenterlineat St. Gertrude, the PhaseIV Project savedeight parcelsfrom full take by reducing theseparcels to partial acquisitions.

A bus turnout would be located at the Warner Avenue.

Change right -of -way requirement from full take to partial take of the following single - family residential parcels: 015 - 215 - 10 ( 150 square feet), 015- 215 -11 ( 50 square feet), 015- 214 - 10 ( 50 square feet), 015- 234 - 10 ( 50 square feet), 015- 233 - 11 ( 50 square feet), 015- 233 - 10 ( 50 square feet), 015- 232 - 11 ( 50 square feet), and ( 015- 232 - 10 ( 50 square feet).

I PhasenumberswereassignedtotheBristolStreetWideningProjectsubsequenttocancelationoftheCenterLine Light Rail Transit Project andassociatedreallocation of funding from that canceledproject to the Bristol Street ANA 305494 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 29
15 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street WideningProject WarnerAve to SaintAndrew Place (Phase IV) Changeright -of -wayrequirementfrom full taketo partialtakeof Parcel408- 336 -17 (3,466 square feet).Land use for the current Project hasbeen changedcomparedto the 1990 FEIS. The following parcels have been changed from Park to Park with Commercial Option: 015- 194 -38 and 015 -194-

39. Precedingprojectphaseinclusiveof thefollowingparcelwhichis nolongerincludedin thePhaseIV Projectright -of -way requirements: 015- 194 -40.

It should be noted that the 1990 FEIS and 2013 NEPA Reevaluation ( URS Corporation) provided comprehensivenoise barriersat all easterlyparcel boundariescurrently fronting the east side of Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place and comprehensivenoise barriers at all westerly parcelboundariescurrentlyfrontingthewestsideof BristolStreetbetweenWestSaintGertrudePlaceand Saint Andrew Place. Using the California Departmentof Transportation's (Caltrans) May 2011 Traffic NoiseAnalysisProtocol, thefollowing noisebarriersweredeterminedto bereasonable: NB -4, NB -5, NB -6, NB -7, NB -8, NB -9, NB -10, and NB -11. These noise barriers are generally equivalent to the recommended noise barriers shown in the 1990 FEIS and 2013 NEPA Reevaluation. However, barriers NB -6, NB -7, NB - 8, andNB -9 would need to be shifted to the west of the receivers (parcels) that are no longer being acquired.

The modifications and other refinementsto the project would not createany additional impacts than what was identified in the 2013 NEPA Reevaluation; thus, there would be no changes or additions to the avoidance, minimization, and/ or mitigation measures.

The proposed PhaseIV Project lane configurations are shown in Figure 5, whereas the lane configurations from the original approved 1990 Final EIS/ EIR are shown in Figure 6.

An assessment of construction and Project related GHG emissions was also not addressed in the 1990 FEIS / EIR, and as a result is addressed in this Addendum.

1. 4. 4 Construction Timeframe
Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would occur following acquisition of the required parcels. Construction of the Project is anticipated to begin in mid -2016 and be completed within approximatelyoneyear (mid- 2017).

1. 5 Discretionary Actions
The Addendumdocumentmustbe adoptedby the City of SantaAna City Councilasto its adequacyin complyingwith the requirementsof CEQA andthe previouslyapproved1990Final EIS /EIR. The City Council will consider the information contained in the Addendum and the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR in making a decisionto approveor deny the proposedproject. No discretionaryactionswith regardsto National EnvironmentalPolicyAct (NEPA), or changesareproposedpursuantto NEPA.

ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 16
75C - 30

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) FIGURE 5 PROPOSED PROJECT LAYOUT
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 31
I v f.A1l n, i 6 k v v.r
e
UYI i4W (1 Np. ' 9E C
yr
7 V;
k IF
Y

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) FIGURE 6 PROPOSED LANE GEOMETRICS - 1990 FINAL EIS / EIR ANA 305494 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 18
75C - 33
ltEtV-
N
art" sites
SOURCE: FINALENVIRONMENTALIMPACTSTATEMENTIENVIRONMENTALIMPACTREPORT, PROPOSEDWIDENINGOF BRISTOLSTREETFROMWHILSHIREAVENUETO WARNERAVENUEINTHE CITYOF SANTAANA, WILLDANASSOCIATES. 1990, FIGURE

PROPOSED LANE GEOMETRICS
1990 FEISIEIR)

BRISTOL STREET WIDENING PROJECT
WARNER AVENUE TO ST. ANDREW PLACE

PHASE IV)
75C - 34

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV)

2. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

2. 1 Background
Project Title:

Bristol Street Widening Phase IV Project
Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of SantaAna
20 Civic Center Plaza, M - 36
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Contact Person and Phone Number:

Kenny Nguyen, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer City of SantaAna (714) 647 -5632 Project Location:

Bristol Streetfrom Warner Avenueto SaintAndrew Placein the City of SantaAna.

Project Sponsor' s Name and Address:

City of SantaAna
20 Civic Center Plaza, M - 36
Santa Ana, CA 92702
General Plan Designation:

General Commercial ( GC), Low Density Residential ( LR -7), Open Space (OS), Park with Commercial P /C)
Zoning:

Specific Plan ( SP1), General Commercial ( C -2), Single Family Residential (RI), Two Family Residential R2)
Description of Project:

The City of SantaAna is proposing to widen the Bristol Streetbetween Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place as part of the previously approved Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane Project, for which an EIS/ EIR was certified in 1990.

The Build Alternative involves the widening of Bristol Street (between Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place) from 4 lanes to 6 lanes with a 150 -foot wide right -of -way crosssection including a 14 -foot wide raised landscaped median; 3 12 -foot wide through travel lanes in each direction; a 7 -foot wide Class II bike lane on each side of the roadway; a 15 -foot wide parkway, and 10 -foot sidewalk with curb ramps for wheelchair accesspursuant to ADA requirementson both sides of the roadway.

As Bristol Street approaches the intersections between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place, and between Warner Avenue and Glenwood Place, the landscaped center median would taper to accommodate right - turn pockets and left -turn lanes in each direction. The landscaped center median would then continue north of the Glenwood Placeintersectionto matchthe existing raisedcentermedian approximately380 feet south of Edinger Avenue. The addition of the landscaped center median would improve safety by preventing left - turn access to /from Saint Gertrude Place, Saint Anne Place, Camden Place, and Carlton Place to the newly widened Bristol Street. (Note: the intersection of Bristol Street and Saint Andrew Place would be convertedto a right -turn only intersectionin both directions.) Additionally, cul-de-sacswould be included on the west sideof Bristol Streetat SaintAnne Place, CamdenPlace, andCarlton Placeto improve safetyby preventing accessto /from thesestreets to the newly widened Bristol Street.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 19 75C - 35

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAve to SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) The wideningwould requirefull andpartial takesof severalparcelsfronting Bristol Streetasdetailedin Table 2 (Property Acquisitions).

Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

The project site is located within a fully developed urban area within the City of SantaAna. Areas surroundingtheprojectsiteconsistof variousurbanusessuchascommercialandretailfacilities, andsingle and multi - family residences.

Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required ( e.g., permits, financing, or participation agreement):

City of SantaAna
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 20 75C - 36

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV)

3. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
This section describesthe effects of the proposedmodifications to the Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV project comparedto those identified in the previously approved 1990 Final EIS/EIR document, and to existing conditions and any changesin regulatory setting since the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Furthermore, this section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The issue areasevaluated in this documentinclude the following, pursuant to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, and have beenmodified to evaluatethe proposedproject changesfor which a Final EIS/EIR has beenpreviously approved ( in 1990) to assist in the determination of the need for a supplemental EIS /EIR or an Addendum. The modified Initial Study checklist is found in Appendix A.

Aesthetics
Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Hydrology/ WaterQuality
Land Use
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population andHousing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation / Traffic
Utilities / Service Systems
Mandatory Findings of Significance
A summary of impacts of the previously approved project and the mitigation measuresimposed is provided along an analysis of the potential impacts resulting from the proposedproject and whether those impacts substantiallyexceedsthosediscussedin thepreviously approved1990Final EIS /EIR.

3. 1 Aesthetics
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections A, Landform Modification, G, Urban Landscaping, J, Light and Glare, and K, Aesthetic Considerations of the previously approved 1990Final EIS /EIR.
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The proposedproject would not result in any significant modifications or changesfrom the previously approved 1990Final EIS /EIR. The Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV intersectionsarelocatedwithin a highly developed urban area of the City. No scenic vistas are located within the project area. No impact to scenic vistas would result from the proposed project.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
There areno statedesignatedscenichighways within the project area. The project is locatedwithin a highly developedand urbanized areaof the City. No scenichighways are located within close proximity, nor is the project areavisible from any scenic highways. No impacts are anticipated in this regard.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 21 75C - 37

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAve to SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? The proposed project involves a total of 43 parcels of which 35 would result in the full take and eight would result in partial take. Field observations indicated that the potentially affected properties ( residential and non- residential) do not have unique characteristics related to their age or condition that would be difficult to replace, or possessattributes that are unique. The proposed project would result in a reduced number of acquired units in comparison to the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR and would not result in substantial changes in visual character as analyzedin thepreviouslyapproved1990FinalEIS/EIR. Implementationof mitigationmeasuresasincludedin the previouslyapproved1990Final EIS /EIR would ensurethatimpactsarereducedto a lessthansignificant level.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Light and glare are currently generatedfrom existing vehicular uses within the PhaseIV project area, commercial and retail businesses, signage, streetlighting, andparking lot lighting. The proposedproject does not involve the constructionof anystructuresotherthanrelocationof streetlighting fixtures. Therefore, no new sources of light or glare are anticipated with implementation of the proposed project. The proposed project would not generate additional daytime or nighttime illumination beyond that currently experienced within the area. Implementation of the proposed project would not create more significant light and glare impacts than previouslyanalyzedin the 1990FinalEIS/EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.

3. 2 Agricultural Resources
The previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR did not include evaluationfor agricultural resources, as no agricultural resources are located within the area of analysis. a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance ( Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? The projectsite is locatedwithin a fully developed, urbanareaof the City of SantaAna. No Prime, Unique, or Farmlandor StatewideImportanceis locatedin thevicinity of the project site. No impactswould result from the proposedproject. The proposedproject would not result in greaterimpacts than previously analyzedin the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with existing zoningfor agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? The project site is locatedwithin a fully developed, urban areaof the City of SantaAna. The project areais designated as General Commercial, Park with Commercial, Open Space, and Low Density Residential by the City of SantaAna GeneralPlanwith a combinationof SpecificPlan (SPI), GeneralCommercial (C), Two Family Residential (R2), andSingleFamily Residential (RI) zoningdesignations. No agriculturalusesexist on siteor in thevicinity, andtheprojectwould not conflict with aWilliamson Act contract. The proposedproject would notresultin greaterimpactsthanpreviouslyanalyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 22 75C - 38

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning, of, forest land ( as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(8)), timberland ( as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production ( as defined by Government Code section 51104(8))?
The project site is located within a fully developed, urban area of the City of Santa Ana. No timberland or forest resourcesexist on site or in the vicinity. The project area is either designated as GeneralCommercial, Park with Commercial, Open Space, or Low Density Residential by the City of Santa Ana General Plan with a combination of Specific Plan ( SP1), General Commercial ( C2), Two Family Residential (R2), and Single Family Residential (R1) zoning designations. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? The project site is located within a fully developed, urban areaof the City of SantaAna. No forest land is located on site or in the vicinity. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use
The project site is fully developed with no agricultural useswithin or in the vicinity. No impact would result from the proposed project. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.

3. 3 Air Quality
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections H, Air Quality andV. ConstructionImpactsof the previously approved1990Final EIS /EIR. a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The Bristol Street Widening PhaseIV project is a component of the ProposedWidening of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane, which was approved in 1990. The Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV Project is included as project number ORA125 in the regional emissionsanalysis conductedby SCAG for the conforming 2013 FTIP adopted by SLAG on September 19, 2012 and approved by FHWA on December 14, 2012. As provided in the FTIP, the Approved Project description reads as follows:

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 23 75C - 39

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project WarnerAve to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) BRISTOL ST ( WARNER TO MEMORY LANE) WIDEN FROM 4 TO 6 LANES ( IMPV AT BRISTOL /WARNER (ADD NBIEBISB TI3RU LAS, WB RT TRY LN) AND BRISTOL /FIRST ( ADD NBISB THRULNS; SB LFTIR TITRN LNS
The PhaseIV Project' s design conceptand scopehave not changedsignificantly 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 conformingprojects, and would have air quality impactsconsistentwith thoseidentified in the state implementationplans (SIPS) for achievingthe NationalAmbient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). FHWA determined the RTIP to conform to the SIP.

The Phase IV Project' s open to the public year is consistent with ( within the same regional emission analysis period as) the construction completion date identified in the FTIP and/or RTP. The FTIP gives priority to eligible TCMs identified in the SIP and provides sufficient funds to provide for their implementation. FHWA determined the TIP to conform to the SIP on December 2010.

ThePhaseIV Projectis alsoincluded in the 2013TIP adoptedby SCAGon September6, 2012andapprovedby FHWA on December 14, 2012.

TheProposedWideningof Bristol Street, from WarnerAvenueto MemoryLaneprojecthasbeenincludedin the federal TIP since 1992. The federal TIP gives priority to eligible TCMs identified in the SIP and provides sufficient funds to provide for their implementation. FHWA determined the TIP to conform to the SIP on April 2, 2009. No significant impacts would occur. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Furthermore, the South Coast Air Basin ( SCAB) is designated by the state and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asnonattaimnentfor ozone (03 ), andparticulatematter (PM10 andPM2.5 ). The SouthCoast Air QualityManagementDistrict (SCAQMD) developedregionalemissionsthresholdsto determinewhetheror not a project would contribute to air pollutant violations. If a project exceeds the regional air pollutant thresholds, then the project would substantiallycontribute to air quality violations in the SCAB. In addition, a project would also contribute to air pollutant violations if localized emissions result in an exceedanee of the ambient air quality standards (AAQS).

Short -term emissionsgeneratedduring project - related constructionactivities would not exceedthe SCAQMD regionalemissionsthresholdsfor anyof thecriteriapollutantsandalsowouldnot substantiallyelevatelocalized concentrationsof thesepollutants. Consequently, the project would be consistentwith the AQMP. Long -tern emissionsgeneratedby the project would not exceedthe SCAQMD thresholdsfor regional emissionsandwould therefore also not contribute to an increase in frequency or severity of air quality violations.

The proposed project would be consistent with the Major Arterial designation of the City of SantaAna General Plan Circulation Elementand the County of Orange's Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Additionally, the project would improve traffic flow and result in a reduction in air pollutant emissions.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
Short -tern emissions were modeled for the construction phase of the proposed street widening project.

Construction activities associated with the project would include demolition of pavement and buildings, fine grading, trenching, paving, and developmentof ancillary strictures. During constructionactivities, emissions from heavyequipmentexhaust, delivery trucks, andfugitive dust would be generatedfor a short duration. To ANA 305 -194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 24
75C - 40

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) accurately determine the significance of air quality impacts from construction activities, construction emissions are quantified and compared to the significance thresholds set by the SCAQMD. Project - specific data, such as constructiontimelines and dimensionsof the project site, along with generaloperatingguidelines, were usedas inputs to the SCAQMD' s California Emissions Estimator Model ( CalEEMod) Model ( version 2011. 1. 1) to quantify construction emissions. As shown in Table 3, emissions calculated by this model were compared to the SCAQMD' s regional significance thresholds.

As shown in Table 3, emissions attributable to construction of the proposed project were found to be below the significance thresholds adopted by the SCAQMD for all the analyzed air pollutants. Because emissions were found to be below the SCAQMD' s significance thresholds, project related construction emissions are not consideredby the SCAQMD to result in a significant impact. In addition, mitigation measuresincluded in the 1990Final EIS /EIR would further reduceconstruction- relatedair quality impacts. ii0: 1 d; 14Wi% 94nW * H61d; 111411[O]11111461619101069 Source: URSCorporation, January2013.

An assessment of regional emissions associated with the operations phase of the proposed project was also conducted which compared emissions with and without the proposed project. Air pollutant emissions generated by roadway vehicles are quantified basedon emissionsrates that vary basedon vehicle speed. Becausethe Proposed Project would increase the roadway capacity along Bristol Street, traffic congestion would be alleviated and average vehicle speedswould increase along improved roadway segments. Table 4 shows the emissions that would occur with and without the proposed Project based on the average vehicle speeds. As shown in Table 4, air pollutant emissions would be less under the With Project Alternative as opposed to the No Project Alternative due to the lower emission rates associated with higher average vehicle speeds. The SCAQMD has established significance thresholds to determine whether the operations phase of projects would result in significant impacts to regional air quality. The proposedproject would result in air pollutant emissions which are below these significance thresholds and would result in a beneficial impact in emissions due to improvements in operational phase efficiencies along project roadway segments for the 2015 project opening year.

Emissions occurring during the 2035 design year were also quantified based on the LOS, average vehicle speed and emission rates that would occur with and without the proposed project. As shown in Table 5, air pollutant emissionsoccurringunder theWith ProjectAlternative would be lessthanunderthe No ProjectAlternative due to lower emission rates associatedwith higher averagespeeds. Consequently, the ProposedProject for the 2035 ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 25 75C - 41
VOC NOx CO S02 PM10I PM2.5
Demolition 8 64 43 1 12 3
Trenching 4 33 19 1 2 2
Grading 7 52 31 1 5 4
Paving 3 15 11 1 1 1
Maximum 8 64 43 1 12 3
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: URS Corporation, January2013.

An assessmentof regional emissions associated with the operations phase of the proposed project was also conducted which compared emissionswith and without the proposed project. Air pollutant emissions generated by roadwayvehiclesare quantifiedbasedon emissionsratesthat vary basedon vehiclespeed. Becausethe ProposedProject would increasethe roadway capacityalong Bristol Street, traffic congestionwouldbe alleviatedand averagevehicle speedswould increasealong improved roadway segments. Table 4 shows the emissionsthat would occur with and without the proposed Project basedon the average vehicle speeds. As shown in Table 4, air pollutant emissions would be less under the With Project Alternativeas opposedto the No Project Alternativedue to the lower emission rates associatedwith higher average vehicle speeds. The SCAQMDhas established significance thresholdsto determine whether the operations phaseof projectswould resultin significantimpactsto regionalair quality. The proposedproject would resultin air pollutant emissions which are below these significance thresholdsand would result in a beneficial impactin emissionsdueto improvementsin operationalphase efficienciesalong project roadway segmentsfor the 2015 project opening year.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAve to SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) project design year would likewise result in emissions which are below the SCAQMD' s significance thresholds and would result in a beneficial impact relative to GHG emissions due to improvements in operational phase efficiencies along project roadway segments.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.

ANA 305 -194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 42
26 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) TABLE 4 YEAR 2015 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS tl .. ..

Year 2015 No Project
BristolStreetBetweenGlenwooc15 76 5 13 0 2 1Place and Warner Avenue BristolStreetBetweenStAndrew15 23 2 4 0 1 0
Place and Glenwood Place
Bristol Street Between Edinger 15 56 4 9 0 1 1
Avenue and St Andrew Place
Total 155 1 11 1 26 1 0 1 4 3
Year 2015 With Project
Bristol Street Between Glenwood
32 54 2 10 0 1 1Place and Warner Avenue
Bristol Street Between St Andrew 32 16 1 3 0 0 0Place and Glenwood Place Bristol Street Between Edinger
Avenue and St Andrew Place 32 40 2 7 0 1 1
Total 110 5 20 0 2 2
DifferencebetweenNoProjectandWithProjectEmissions
Bristol Street Between Glenwood 22 3 3 0 1 1Place and Warner Avenue Bristol Street Between St Andrew
7 1 1 0 0 0Place and Glenwood Place
Bristol Street Between Edinger
Avenue and St Andrew Place 16 2 2 0 1 1
Total 45 6 6 0 2 1
SCAQMD Significance 550 55 55 150 150 55
Thresholds
Exceeds Thresholds No No No No No No
Notes: mph = miles per hour
Source. URSCorporation, January2013,
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 27 75C - 43

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAve to SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) TABLE 5 YEAR 2035 WITH AND WITHOUT PROJECT AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS F
d 3N. -[ z'Fc'` ^' iT'
3aa + r nv+ u . ....' w. N?.. - iv v'•Y -. i `...n2x - ' ji` +. hmr t d4 1u.'%tva'.. 5 -. v ' w- m iS°FcYS'.3<vn Year 2035 No Project
Bristol Street Between Glenwood 13 41 3 7 1 3 2
Place and Warner Avenue
Bristol Street Between St Andrew 13 12 1 2 1 1 1
Place and Glenwood Place
Bristol Street Between Edinger 13 30 2 5 1 2 1
Avenue and St Andrew Place
Total 83 6 13 1 5 4
Year 2035 With Project,
Bristol Street Between Glenwood 25 32 2 5 1 2 1
Place and Warner Avenue
Bristol Street Between St Andrew 25 10 0 1 1 0 0
Place and Glenwood Place
Bristol Street Between Edinger 25 24 1 4 1 1 1
Avenue and St Andrew Place
Total 65 1 3 1 10 1 0 3 2
Difference betweenNo Project and With Project Emissions Bristol Street Between Glenwood g 2 2 1 1 1
Place and Warner Avenue
Bristol Street Between St Andrew 3 0 1 1 0 0
Place and Glenwood Place
Bristol Street Between Edinger 7 1 1 1 1 1
Avenue and St Andrew Place
Total 18 3 4 1 2 2
SCAQMD Significance 550 55 55 150 150 55
Thresholds
Exceeds Thresholds No No No No No No
Notes: mph = miles per hour
Source: URSCorporation, January2013,
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 44
28 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard ( including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
The SCAB is designatedby the EPA and the Stateasbeing nonattainmentfor 03 , PM10 , and PM2.5 . In accordancewith SCAQMD methodology, any project that doesnot exceedor canbe mitigated to less than the daily threshold values doesnot add significantly to a cumulative impact. Sincethe proposedproject would not exceed the SCAQMD' s significance thresholds for construction activities or the operations phase, the SCAQMD does not consider emissions from the project to add significantly to any cumulative impact.

Furthermore, it shouldbe notedthattheproposedprojectwould increasethe capacityat threeout of the four study intersections (Bristol Street at Edinger Avenue has already beenwidened) during both AM and PM peak hours. Increasesin roadway capacity would result in improvement in the LOS along Bristol Street. The improvementin LOS would result in increasesin averagevehicle speedandreductionsin the amountof delay vehicles experience at intersections thereby resulting in both lower emissions and lower emissions rates associated with higher vehicle speeds. As such, the project would continue to result in a beneficial impact.

Implementationof the proposedproject would not result in greaterimpactsthan previously analyzedin the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? A project could have the potential to expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations if it would cause or contribute substantially to elevated pollutant concentration levels or place the project in an area with elevated pollutant concentrations. An evaluation of air pollutant emissions as it affects local sensitive receptors has been conducted for both the construction and operations phases of the project.

Localized Construction Impacts
Localized air pollutant emissions are evaluated relative to the exposure of local sensitive uses to air pollutant concentrations generatedby the proposed Project. These are pollutant concentrations which can be directly correlatedto the health -basedambientair quality standards. This differs from regional emissionswhich were discussed previously in that regional emissions are used to assesshow much air pollution is generated within an air basin and does not have a direct correlation with health effects.

Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) have been developedby the SCAQMD for NOx , CO, PM10, and PM2.5 . The LSTs determine whether project- related emissions would substantially contribute to or exceed the ambient air quality standards and expose sensitive receptors to excessive concentrations of air pollutants.

The LSTs differ based on distance such that a greater allowance in air pollutant emissions is allowed for construction activities occurring further from a sensitive use and a lesser allowance in emissions is given for construction activities occurring closer to sensitive uses.

Only short-teen emissions occurring at the project site for the Project' s constriction phase were included to determine if sensitive receptors local to the project site would adversely affected. Emissions generatedby construction activities disperse rapidly with distance from the construction site. Individual construction phases were compared against the SCAQMD' s LST significance criteria. As shown in Table 6, project emissionswould not exceedthe LST screeninglevel criteria for CO, NO2 , PM10 , or PM2.5 . Because emissions associated with this alternative would be less than the LST, onsite construction emissions would not be expected to exceed the federal or California AAQS at the nearest sensitive receptors. As such, no significant air quality impacts related to localized air pollutants would occur from the construction phase.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 29 75C - 45

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAve to SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) TABLE 6 LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS ANALYSIS FOR CONSTRUCTION

ACTIVITIES
Intersection Hot - Spots
While the proposedProject would not result in any direct sourcesof localized emissions due to the roadway streetlighting beingpoweredby electricity, changesin LOS or traffic volumesdueto theprojectmay cause indirect sources of localized emissions. While emissions of motor vehicles have improved due to more stringent vehicle emissions standardsand the use of cleaner burning fuels, they continue to be the primary source of local emissions within the study area. Localized areas where ambient concentrations exceed national and /or state standards for CO are known as hotspots. The SCAQMD defines typical sensitive receptors as residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long -term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes.

Because CO is produced in greatestquantities from vehicle combustion and does not readily disperse into the atmosphere, adherence to AAQS is typically demonstrated through an analysis of localized CO concentrations. Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of CO called " hot spots." These pockets have the potential to exceed the state one -hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight -hour standard of 9.0 ppm. Note that the federal levels are based on one- and eight -hour standards of 35 and 9 ppm, respectively. Thus, an exceedanceconditionwould occurbasedon the statestandardsbeforethe federal standards.

The following intersectionsweremodeled for CO hotspots:

Bristol Street and Warner Avenue
Bristol Street and Glenwood Place
Bristol Street and St. Andrew Place
Bristol Street and W. Edinger Avenue
As shown in Table 7, both the 1 -hour and 8 -hour CO concentrations at the intersections that were affected by the proposedproject would be substantiallybelow the California andfederalambientair quality standardsfor CO, potential CO impacts related to the project alternatives are below AAQS and would not result in a significant air quality impact from CO hotspots.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 30 75C - 46
LIUTAfi( Lf. ud) t)( Rl1Tl PMFlSE NOx CO PM10 PMzex r. r Demolition 61 40 4 3
Grading 52 30 5 4
Trenching 33 19 2 2
Paving 15 1 11 1 1 1 1
SCAQMD Threshold 183 1, 253 13 7
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Source: URSCorporation, January2013.

IntersectionHot - Spots
Whilethe proposedProjectwouldnot resultin any direct sourcesof localized emissionsdueto the roadway street lightingbeing poweredby electricity, changesin LOSor traffic volumesdueto the projectmay cause indirect sourcesof localized emissions. While emissionsof motor vehicleshave improveddue to more stringentvehicle emissionsstandardsand the useof cleaner burningfuels, they continueto be the primary sourceof local emissionswithin the study area. Localizedareas where ambient concentrationsexceed nationaland /or state standardsfor CO are knownas hotspots. The SCAQMD defines typical sensitive receptorsas residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long -term health care facilities, rehabilitationcenters, convalescentcenters, and retirementhomes.

BecauseCOis producedin greatest quantitiesfrom vehicle combustionand doesnot readily disperseinto the atmosphere, adherenceto AAQSis typically demonstratedthroughan analysisof localizedCO concentrations. Areasof vehicle congestionhave the potentialto create pocketsof CO called "hot spots." These pocketshavethe potentialto exceedthe state one -hour standardof 20 ppmor the eight -hour standard of 9.0 ppm. Note that the federal levelsare basedon one- and eight -hour standardsof 35 and9 ppm, respectively. Thus, an exceedanceconditionwould occurbasedon the state standardsbeforethe federal standards.

The following intersectionswere modeledfor CO hotspots:

Bristol Street and Warner Avenue
Bristol Street and Glenwood Place
Bristol Street and St. Andrew Place
Bristol Street and W. Edinger Avenue
As shownin Table7, boththe1 - hour and8 - hour CO concentrationsat the intersectionsthat were affectedby the proposedprojectwouldbe substantiallybelowthe Californiaand federal ambientair quality standardsfor CO, potentialCO impacts relatedto the project alternativesare below AAQS and would not resultin a significantair quality impactfromCO hotspots.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867YU 30
75C -46

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) TABLE 7 CO HOTSPOT ANALYSIS ( PPM)
As discussed previously, the proposed project would not result in air pollutant concentrations that exceed the SCAQMD' s Localized Significance Thresholds for construction activities. In addition, the operations phase of the project would not result in CO hotspots. As such, the constriction and operations phases of the project would not result in significant impactsto air quality which would exposesensitivereceptorsto substantialair pollutant concentrations.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Construction activities associatedwith the proposed Project may generatedetectable odors from heavy- duty construction equipment and exhaust. Odors associated with diesel and gasoline fumes are transitory in nature and would not createobjectionableodors affecting a substantialnumber of people. The impacts from these odors would be short -tern, would cease upon project completion and are not anticipated to be significant.

Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No additional new mitigation measures are required.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 31 75C - 47
WE
Bristol Street and Warner Avenue`
Northeast Receptor 6.8 20 4.6 9.0 No No
Southeast Receptor 6.9 20 4.7 9.0 No No
Southwest Receptor 6.9 20 4.7 9.0 No No
Northwest Receptor 6.9 20 4.7 9.0 No No
Bristol Streetand GlenwoodPlace
Northeast Receptor 6.5 20 4.4 9.0 No No
Southeast Receptor 6.5 20 4.4 9.0 No No
Southwest Receptor 6.6 20 4.5 9.0 No No
Northwest Receptor 6.6 20 4.5 9.0 No No
Bristol Street and St. Andrew Place
Northeast Receptor 6.4 20 4.3 9.0 No No
Southeast Receptor 6.4 20 4.3 9.0 No No
Southwest Receptor 6.5 20 4.4 9.0 No No
Northwest Receptor 6.5 20 4.4 9.0 No No
Bristol Street and St„Andrew Place
Northeast Receptor 7. 1 20 4. 8 9.0 No No
Southeast Receptor 7. 1 20 4.8 9.0 No No
Southwest Receptor 7. 2 20 4.9 9.0 No No
Northwest Receptor 7. 1 20 4.8 9.0 No No
Source: URSCorporation, January2012.

As discussed previously, the proposedproject wouldnot resultin air pollutant concentrationsthat exceedthe SCAQMD's Localized Significance Thresholdsfor construction activities. In addition, the operations phaseof the project would not resultin CO hotspots. As such, the constrictionand operationsphasesof the project wouldnot resultin significantimpactsto air quality which would expose sensitive receptorsto substantialair pollutant concentrations.

Mitigation Measures
No additionalnew mitigation measuresare required.
e) Create objectionableodors affectinga substantial numberof people? Constructionactivities associatedwith the proposedProjectmay generate detectableodorsfrom heavy- duty construction equipmentand exhaust. Odors associatedwith dieseland gasolinefumesare transitoryin nature and wouldnot create objectionableodors affectinga substantialnumberof people. The impactsfrom these odors wouldbe short -tern, would cease upon project completionand are not anticipatedto be significant.

Implementationof the proposedProject wouldnot resultin greater impactsthan previously analyzedin the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No additionalnew mitigation measuresare required.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867YU 31
75C - 47

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAve to SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV)

3. 4 Biological Resources
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection E, Streambed Modification, of the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR. a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special - status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
The project siteis locatedwithin a fully developedurbanareawithin the City of SantaAna. No specialnatural habitat existson or in the vicinity of the proposedproject. Implementationof the proposedproject would not result in greaterimpactsthanpreviously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
Refer to response in 3.4 (a), above. No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities are identified in the project areaor vicinity. Implementationof the proposedprojectwould not result in greaterimpactsthan previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act ( including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Refer to response in 3.4 ( a), above. No federally protected wetlands are identified in the project area or vicinity. Theproposedprojectis locatedwithin afully developedurbanareaof theCity. Implementationof the proposedproject would not resultin greaterimpactsthanpreviously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
The proposedproject would not interfere with the movementof any native residentor migratory fish or wildlife species, corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites, as none are located within the project area. The proposedproject is located within a fully developedurban areaof the City. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinancesprotecting biological resources, such as a tree PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 32
75C - 48

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project WarnerAve to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) preservation policy or ordinance?
The proposed project may involve the removal of existing landscaping, including trees. Any removal or planting of treesis required to comply with the City of SantaAna Municipal Code, Article VII, Regulation of the Planting, Maintenance, and Removal of Trees. Furthermore, the proposedproject would not conflict with the City' s tree ordinance. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed project site is not a part of any habitat conservation plan. The project site is developed with urban uses and no natural conservation plans are adopted for the area. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in greaterimpactsthanpreviously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 5 Cultural Resources
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection T, Cultural Resources, of the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR. a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as de£ med in § 15064. 5?
The proposed project would not involve changes that were not addressed in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR. Based on aerial photographs and a windshield survey, the structures do not appear to be of historical significance due to unique architecture and are not anticipated to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Land uses within the Phase IV project area affected parcels include single family residential, parking lots, strip malls, shoppingplazas, andvarious office uses. Implementationof the proposed project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064. 5?
Due to the limited area of disturbance, within an existing developed and urban area, and limited depth of proposed excavations, the potential to uncover archaeological resources is considered low. However, implementation of mitigation measuresas included in the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR would reduce impacts to archaeological resources yet uncovered or undiscovered. The proposed project would not result in archaeological impacts greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 33 75C - 49

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAve to SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) As shownin ChapterVI, ResourcesElement, of the County of OrangeGeneralPlan, the project site is not locatedin an area of paleontologicalsensitivity. Also, the proposedproject would involve only shallow excavation. Furthermore, since the project area is already developed, the potential for discovering paleontologicalresourcesduring constructionis low. Soilsoccurringin theprojectareaaremostly Quaternary Alluvium. Typically, thesedepositsarelessthan10,000yearsold, andnot likely to containimportantfossils.

No greaterimpactsto paleontologicalresourcesthanpreviously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR would result from project implementation.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Disturb any human remains, including thoseinterred outsideof formal cemeteries? The project site is locatedwithin a fully developedurbanareaof the City. No formal cemeteriesarelocated within theprojectareaor vicinity. However, in theeventthathumanremainsareuncoveredduringgradingor excavation, contractorsarerequiredto complywith theproceduresandrequirementssetforth in theCalifornia HealthandSafetyCodeSection7050.5 andPublicResourcesCodeSection 2098.98. The CountyCoronerand, in the eventthat theremainsareNativeAmerican, theNative American Heritage Commission would be notified and, in turn, would notify those personsbelieved to be most likely descended from the deceased for appropriate disposition of the remains. The proposed project would not result in humanremains impact greaterthan previously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 6 Geology and Soils
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections A, Landform Modification, B. Seismic Hazards, C. Erosion Impacts, and F. Water Quality, of the previously approved 1990 Final EIS /EIR.
a) i Rupture of a known earthquake fault, iv
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
substantial evidence of a known fault? Re
Publication 42.
delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo
State Geologist for the area or based on other
er to Division of Mines and Geology Special
TheCity of SantaAnais not includedin theAlquist - PrioloEarthquakeFaultZoningMap. Theprojectsiteis not underlainby an active fault and the closestfault, the Newport- InglewoodFault, is approximatelyeight milesto thewest. Theproposedwideningwould not resultin greaterimpactsthanpreviouslyanalyzedin the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
a) ii Strong seismic ground shaking?
The Newport - Inglewood Fault is the closest fault to the project site and is the most likely source of ground shakingimpacts. The proposedproject is an intersectionwidening project andwould not exposepeopleor structuresto adversegroundshakingimpact. Theproposedwideningwouldnot resultin greaterimpactsthan previously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 34
75C - 50

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
a) iii Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? The project site is not identified by the 1990 EIS /EIR as having a high liquefaction potential but is near areas classified as high to medium liquefaction potential. In addition, the project would be constructed to achieve the standardsoutlined in the California Building Code to reduce impacts in this regard. Consequently, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to potential liquefaction impact. The proposed widening would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
a) iv Landslides?
The proposed project site is generally flat and does not contain any significant slopes. The proposed Project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Exposure of barren rock and soil surfaces during construction would result in soil erosion. However, considering the slight gradient, anticipated erosion impact is minimal. Furthermore, the project would be subjectto National PollutantDischargeElimination System (NPDES) permitting regulation, including the developmentand implementation of a StormwaterPollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction activities. The SWPPP requires construction contractors to implement best management practices ( BMPs) to reduce sediment from impacting the stormwater system. The increased erosion impact due to the intersection widening would not be substantially greaterthan previously analyzed. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
The 1990 EIS /EIR indicated that there are no instances of midisturbed, natural soils. The project site is underlain by well- drained alluvial fan or flood plains and is not included in the areasof high subsidenceor high liquefaction hazard ( but located south of an area identified as high to medium subsidence for liquefaction). The project area is fully developed with urban useswithin the City. The proposed project will be constructed in accordance with the standards of the Uniform Building Code ( UBC). The proposed project would not creategreaterimpact thanpreviously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code ( 1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 35 75C - 51

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) The proposed project would not include the construction of any structures other than relocation of existing utilities. The proposed project would not create substantial risks to life or property and the proposed project would not creategreaterimpacts thanpreviously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? The proposedproject would not generateany sewageor wastewaterand would not requireinstallation of any septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems. No impacts are anticipated in this regard.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection H, Air Quality, and V. Construction Impacts of the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
The 1990 Final EIS /EIR did not evaluate global climate change or greenhouse gas ( GHG) impacts.

Construction activities would consume fuel and result in the generation of GHG emissions. Construction of the project is anticipatedto begin in the early 2015andbe completelater that year. Construction- relatedGHG 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 proposesintersectionwidening of Bristol Streetfrom Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place, thereforeonly carbondioxide (CO2 ) emissionsfrom mobile- sourcesareevaluated. Similarto the other criteria pollutants, the highest emissions would occur between 0 to 10 mph and 50 mph and above.

Because the project would improve traffic flow within the Phase IV project area, the project would result in reduced CO2 emissions. Consequently, GHG emissionsassociatedwith the project would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
The proposedprojectwould not conflict with applicableplans, policy or regulationsadoptedfor thepurposeof reducingtheemissionsof GHG. Theproposedprojectwouldresultin improvedtraffic flow, reducedvehicle idling timesandcongestion. Implementationof theproposedprojectwould notresultin newimpactsto GHG.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 36 75C - 52

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project WarnerAve to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV)

3. 8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections V, Construction Impacts, X, Hazardous Materials, of the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR. a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
The proposed project would result in demolition of structures. Compliance with the standard protocol surveys and abating procedures would be required prior to any demolition activities that would potentially disturb existing building materials. Furthermore, specific requirementslimiting asbestosemissionsfrom building demolition activities are set forth in SCAQMD Rule 1403 ( Asbestos Emission From Demolition /Renovation Activities). The existing structures to be demolished and roadway paintings and markers are also required to be surveyed for lead - based paint prior to demolition, in compliance with the applicable local, state, and federal regulations administered through the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health. Compliancewith existing regulationswould ensurethat impacts are not greaterthan previouslyanalyzedin the 1990Final EISBIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Refer to response in 3.8 ( a), above. Compliance with existing regulations and mitigation measures from the 1990Final EISBIR would ensurethat impactsarenot greaterthanpreviouslyanalyzedin the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? There are two schools that lie within one - quarter mile of the project site. Table 8 provides a summary of schools within the Bristol Street Widening , Phase IV project area.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 37 75C - 53

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project WarnerAve to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) TABLE 8 LOCAL SCHOOLS WITHIN THE PHASE IV PROJECT AREA
Sa=6 I L Oi. " CSx4"'Cx;p' 3' K{i4 V' C L"' IY' r' L 5^ W'. 2C' 3 3r't C'Ti -`'H" Jose Andres Sepulveda 1801 S Poplar Street, Santa Ana, CA West of Bristol Street at Saint0, 11 miles ElementarySchool 92704 Andrew Place intersection
1202 West Edinger Avenue, Santa Ana, Northeast of Bristol Street at Saint Mater Del High School 0.25 miles
CA 92707 Andrew Place intersection
Hazardous materials can be classified into four basic categories: toxins, flammables, irritants, and explosives. Toxins include a broad range of industrial chemicals and agricultural pesticides that may cause serious illness or death to humans. Irritants can cause inflammation or destruction of living tissue with effects ranging from mild to severe, depending on the degree of exposureand material involved.

Flammables pose the threat of combustion at low ignition temperatures and rapid burning characteristics.

Explosives canproducerapid chemicalreactionscausingdamagefrom blast andflash fire.

Because of their widespread use, it was assumed that each type of hazardous material was transported through, used, or stored to some degree, within the project area. Storage and use of hazardous materials was, and still is, generally limited to the industrial areato the west although hazardousmaterials are used or stored along Bristol Street at businessessuch asgas stations, auto service shops, metal polishing and plating operations, and medical clinics. Both Mater Dei High School and JoseAndres SepulvedaElementary School were identified and evaluated for potential impact in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. It is not anticipated that the project would increase risk of upset beyond previous conditions. Therefore, health risks associated with project construction activities would be less than significant and impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962. 5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
The proposedprojectsite involvesthewidening of an existingintersection. The projectareais developed with commercialand retail uses. Compliancewith existingregulationsandmitigation measuresfrom the 1990 Final EIS /EIR would ensure that impacts are not greater than previously analyzed in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? The project site is not within an airport land use plan. The closest airport to the site is John Wayne — Orange County Airport, miles southeastof the project site. The proposedwidening would not introduce any new risks or increase risks associated with the project.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 54
38 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street 1Mdeninq Protect Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip and would not create any safety hazard. The proposed project would not create additional significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency responseplan or emergency evacuation plan?
The disruption of traffic and restricted accessalong Bristol Street between Warner Avenue and Saint Andrew Place during construction would affect the mobility of emergency vehicles. However, provisions would be made for interim accessand traffic control plans would be prepared prior to each step in the construction process. Advance warning and information signs would be used to reduce the confusion motorists may experience during the construction process. It is expectedthat Bristol Street would remain openduring construction. Although the proposedproject may interfere with an emergencyevacuationplan, it would be short term during construction, and the mobility would improve once the project is completed.

Compliance with mitigation measures from the 1990 Final EIS / EIR would ensure that impacts are not greaterthanpreviously analyzedin the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
The proposed project site is developedwith various urban useswithin the City. There are no wildlands in the project vicinity andno new significant impactswould resultwith project implementation.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 9 Hydrology and Water Quality
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections C, Erosion Impacts, D, Floodplain /Floodway Encroachment, and F, Water Quality of the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? As part of Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, the EPA has established regulations under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) program to control direct stormwater discharges. The proposed project would be required to comply with the NPDES program for the SantaAna Regional Water Quality Control Board ( SARWQCB).

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 55
39 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Construction Activities
Grading and excavationanduse of hazardousmaterials during constructionwould createpotential sources of polluted discharge. The construction contractor is required to conform to the requirements of the Statewide NPDES Storm Water Permit. Pursuant to the CWA, in 2001, the State Water Quality Control Board ( SWRCB) issued a statewide general NPDES Permit for stormwater discharges from construction sites ( NPDES No. CAS000002). Under this Statewide General Construction Activity permit, discharges of stormwater from construction sites with a disturbed area of one or more acres are required to either obtain individual NPDES permits for stormwater discharges or to be covered by the General Permit. In addition, best management practices ( BMPs) specified in the Caltrans Storm Water Management Plan ( SWMP) are also applicable. The construction contractor is required to conform to the requirements of the General NPDES Permit for Construction Activities andany subsequentGeneralPermit in effect at the time of project construction.

As part of the statewide NPDES permit, the construction contractor would be required to implement BMPs into their construction operations to reduce potential water quality impacts to the maximum extent practicable through preparation of a SWPPP. The General Permit contains requirements that BMPs must meet, including:

Erosion Control
Erosion control, also called stabilization, is the protection of the soil surface so that soil particles do not becomedetachedby water or wind; andtrappingsoil particlesthat dobecomedetachedandaremovedby water or wind.

Non - Stormwater Management
Non- stormwater management is the reduction or avoidance of discharges other than stonnwater, such as from cleaningof vehiclesand equipment, and spills of hazardousmaterialsand hazardouswastes. Non- stormwater management includes requirements for the use and storage of hazardous substances so as to avoid spills andminimizes pollution by cleaning spills that do occur.

The SWPPP contains BMPs chosen for a project based on the specific activities that would be conducted as part of that project, and the amounts of stormwater and non - stormwater runoff that are anticipated. The 1990 Final EIS / EIR included a mitigation measure to control stormwater runoff associated with construction activities. Impacts would be less than significant and would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Moreover, theprojectwouldcomplywith theupdatedNPDESrequirements, asdescribedabove.

Operational Phase
Operation of the proposed intersection has the potential to degrade water quality as a result of vehicular travel, including increasesin such pollutants as oil, gasoline, grease, lead, and dust. Discharge from the proposedproject to stormwaterfacilities would consistof non -point sources. Stormwaterquality is generally affectedby the lengthof time sincethe lastrainfall, rainfall intensity, urbanusesof the area, andthe quantity of transported sediments. Typical urban water quality pollutants usually result from motor vehicle operations, oil and greaseresidue. The majority of pollutant loads areusually washedaway during the first flush of the storm occurring after the dry seasonperiod. Due to the nature of the proposedproject, generally occurring within an existing developedarea, project impacts are not consideredadverse. Consequently, impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 56
40 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land usesor planned usesfor which permits have been granted)?
The project site is alreadydevelopedandis not a groundwaterrechargingarea. The proposedBristol Street Widening Phase IV project would not result in increased water consumption and would not deplete groundwater supplies. No impact to groundwater supplies would result from the proposed project. No mitigation measuresare necessary. Impacts would be similar to thoseidentified in the 1990Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site?
The project site is already developedand the existing drainagepattern would not be changeddue to the implementation of Bristol Street Widening Phase IV project. The storm drain improvements would be limited to relocation and /or construction of catch basins as necessary. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite due to drainage alteration.

No mitigation measuresare necessary. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off -site? The project site is alreadydevelopedand the existing drainagepattern would not be changeddue to the Bristol Street Widening Phase IV. ' Be storm drain improvements would be limited to construction of properly designed curb and gutter as necessary. The proposed project would not result in substantial reduction in impervious ground surfaces. The proposed project would not increase the rate or amount of surfacerunoff to createon- or offsite flooding. Impactswould not be greaterthan previously analyzedin the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
The project site is already developed and the existing drainage pattern would not be changeddue to the Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV project. The storm drain improvements would be limited to construction of catch basins as necessary. The proposed project would not result in substantial increase in impervious ground surfaces. The proposed project would not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff to create on- or offsite flooding. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 57
41 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street WideningProjectWarnerAve to SaintAndrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Theprojectsiteis currentlydevelopedandtheproposedprojectwould not resultin substantialchangesto the volume or nature of the urban runoff. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. The proposed project would be required to adhere to water quality regulatory requirements, as described above.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
g) Placehousingwithin a 100 -year flood hazard area as mappedon a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood InsuranceRate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? The proposedwidening would not placeany housingwithin a 100 -year flooding zone asmappedby the FIRM. No impact would result from the proposed project. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
TheBristol StreetWideningPhaseIV projectwouldnotplaceanystructureswithin a 100 -yearfloodhazard zone. No impact would result from the proposed project.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding asa result of the failure of a leveeor dam? Theproposedstreetwideningdoesnot involve developmentof any above -gradestructuresexceptfor the relocation of utility poles. Therefore, the proposedproject would not exposepeople or structuresto a significantfloodingrisk anygreaterthanwhat is alreadyexistingonsite. No impactwould resultfrom the proposed project.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
The project site is approximately 10 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean. The likelihood of tsunami impactinga sitemorethanfive miles inlandis minimal. Theprojectsiteandits vicinity arebuilt out with urban uses and there is no unusual slope or geologic feature in the area. The potential for seiche, tsunami, or mudflowimpactingtheprojectsiteis lessthansignificant. Impactswouldbe similarto thoseidentifiedin the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 42 75C - 58

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 10 Land Use and Planning
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection A, Landfonn Modification, of the 1990 Final EIS / EIR. a) Physically divide an establishedcommunity?
The project area is developed with various urban uses and the proposedwidening would not divide an established community. Although there would be partial and full takes, the project would not create a physical barrier to separatea community. The proposed project would not introduce any significant land use impacts than previously analyzed. No significant impact would result from the project implementation.

Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project ( including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
The proposed project would not result in changes to the land use designation of the acquired parcels. The proposedproject is in compliance with the existing designationand would not createa new conflict. No significant impact is anticipated. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?
The project site is not apart of any habitat conservation plan. The project site is already fully developed and the proposedwidening would not conflict with any habitat conservationplan or natural community. No impact is anticipated. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 11 Mineral Resources
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection W, Consumption of Renewable and Non - Renewable Resources of the 1990 Final EIS / EIR. a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
The project site is currently developed and does not contain any areas for the extraction of mineral resources. The proposed project would not involve excavation that would likely identify previously ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 59
43 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) unidentified mineral resources. No impact to mineral resources would result from the proposed project. hnpacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Theprojectsiteis currentlydevelopedandis notdelineatedasamineralresourcesrecoverysiteby theCity of Santa Ana General Plan. Implementation of the proposed project would have no impact on the mineral resourcesandno mitigation measuresarenecessary. Impacts would be similar to thoseidentified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 12 Noise
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, Subsection I, Noise, and V, Construction Impacts of the 1990 Final EIS / EIR. a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Theproposedprojectinvolveswidening of Bristol StreetbetweenWarnerAvenueandSaintAndrew Place.

The land uses in between Warner Avenue and St. Gertrude Place, and adjacent to the project, are commercial (CategoryC) on the west sideof Bristol Street, anda mix of residentialandcommercialland uses on the east side of Bristol Street. The land uses on both sides of Bristol Street between St. Gertrude and St. Andrew Place are residential. Mater Dei High School is located along the east side of Bristol Street north of St. Andrew Place. JoseAndres SepulvedaElementary School is west of Bristol Streetin this samearea.

Thefuturenoisemodelingresultsof the 1990FinalEIS /EIR indicatedthatfuturenoiselevelswould beno more than one dBA higher with the project as compared to levels without project improvements ( noise level changesof lessthan3 dBA arenormallyinaudibleto thehumanear).

The 1990 Final EIS /EIR ( and 2013 NEPA Reevaluation) provided comprehensive noise barriers at all easterlyparcelboundariescurrentlyfronting the eastsideof Bristol StreetbetweenWarnerAvenueand Saint Andrew Placeand comprehensivenoisebarriers at all westerly parcel boundariescurrently fronting the west side of Bristol StreetbetweenWest Saint Gertrude Place and SaintAndrew Place. The following noise barriers were determined to be reasonable: NB -4, NB -5, NB -6, NB -7, NB -8, NB -9, NB - 10, and NB - 11.

Thesenoisebarriersaregenerallyequivalentto therecommendednoisebarriersshownin the 1990FEISand 2013 Reevaluation. However, barriers NB - 6, NB -7, NB -8, and NB -9 would need to be shifted to the west of the receivers (parcels) that areno longer being acquiredin whole such that thesebarriers are now proposed atthewesterlyparcelboundariesthatfronttheeastsideof BristolStreetbetweenSaintAnnePlaceandSaint Andrew Place ( refer to Figure 7a and Figure 7b). Furthermore, the reasonable noise barriers would be constructed at a height of 8 feet, as opposed to 6 feet as identified in the 1990 FEIS and 2013 NEPA Reevaluation. The modifications and other refinements to the project would not create any additional impacts than what was identified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

With implementation of the mitigation measures from the 1990 Final EIS /EIR, noise impacts would be similar to that identified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 60
44 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

ANA 305 -194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 W 45
75C - 61

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street WideningProject WarnerAve to SaintAndrew Place (Phase IV) FIGURE 7A NOISE MONITORING AND MODELING LOCATIONS
ANA 305 - 194 ( PLR 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 46 75C - 62

GEERRTRUDEPLACE-
RzI

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) FIGURE 7B NOISE MONITORING AND MODELING LOCATIONS
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 PU
75C - 64
47 IW 11A
t
K `
idreasgedantary,'h i
ool - M 1h ' 1
Al
dM2aF
M-2h
f u
I<
its r( b
Mater Del
High School
ryr
Al
M-2h

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Refer to response in 3. 12 ( a.) above. Project construction will involve typical groundborne noise and vibration. However, themajorityof constructionactivitieswill consistof standardprocedures, andwill be relativelylimited for anyparticulararea. Constructionactivitieswould complywith the City of SantaAna Municipal Code, which limits construction noise to the least noise sensitive portions of the day. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR with implementation of mitigation measures as included in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Refer to response in 3.12 (a.) above. During construction of the proposed project, the noise associated with constructionmay intermittently dominatethe noise environmentin the immediateareaof construction.

Typical constructionequipmentfor roadwayconstructionis expectedto generatenoiselevelsrangingfrom 74 to 89 decibels ( 0) at a distance of 50 feet. However, no additional adverse noise impacts from construction are anticipated as construction would comply with the City of SantaAna Municipal Code, which limits construction noise to the least noise sensitive portions of the day. Construction equipment would be properly fitted and maintained according to the manufacturer's specifications. Furthermore, construction noise would be short- tern, temporary and cease upon completion of the proposed project.

Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR with implementation of mitigation measures, as identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Refer to responses3.12 (c), above, for discussion regarding temporary noise impacts associatedwith construction.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project exposepeople residing or working in the project area to excessivenoiselevels? The project site is not located within an airport land use plan. The nearest airport is the John Wayne Airport approximately3.5 miles southeastof the southernmostPhaseIV project intersection. No impacts would occur. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project areato excessivenoiselevels?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 66
48 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) Refer to response 3.12 ( e.), above. The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 13 Population and Housing
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections L, Population, M, Housing Displacement, N, Business Displacement, O, Impacts on Neighborhood Character and Minority Groups, and R, Effect on Assessed Property Values, of the 1990 Final EIS / EIR. No take of residential parcels is proposed as part of this project. a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly ( for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly ( for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure?
Bristol StreetandWarner Avenuearecurrently heavily traveledroadwaysandthe City of SantaAna is fully built out. The proposedproject is designedto accommodatethe existing andfuture traffic volume andwould not create significant numbers of new trips. The proposed widening would not result in additional impact.

Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed project' s Build Alternative is anticipated to result in full or partial acquisitions of approximately 43 parcels along the project study area. The acquired parcels are defined as distinct locations where residential and non - residential displacement could occur along the project alignment. The project is anticipated to result in the acquisition of 27 single - family residential units. This compares to a total of 28 single - family residential units (6 partial and 22 full acquisitions) asidentified in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR. Of the 27 residential units that would be displaced as part of the proposed Project, 14 parcels would be considered partial acquisitions and 13 parcels would be considered full acquisitions. Since comparable relocation properties appear to be available in the metropolitan SantaAna area in sufficient quantity, the need for replacement housing would not be triggered due to project implementation. The number of displaceesresulting from the Proposedproject are anticipatedto be less than identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR due to the reduction in number of full acquisition of single - family residential units.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed project requires the acquisition of 27 single - family units could possibly result in displacing approximately 82 residents (URS Corporation, November 2011). The construction of replacement housing elsewherewould not be necessarybecausecomparablerelocation propertiesappearto be available in the metropolitan Santa Ana area in sufficient quantity. The project involves the widening Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place in an urbanized, residential/ commercial area of the City of Santa Ana. The required relocations would not disproportionately affect any specific group or groups of ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 67
49 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTREPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street WideningProject WarnerAve to SaintAndrew Place (PhaseIV) individuals. Before any displacementoccurs, residentialand non - residentialdisplaceeswill be presented with a list of comparable replacement properties that are available within the last six months for rent, lease, or purchase regardless of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, and would be consistent with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 14 Public Services
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsectionsP, Impactson CommunityFacilities, andV, Constructionhnpactsof the 1990Final EIS /EIR. a) Fire Protection?
The proposedproject is an intersection widening project and no increase in demandfor fire protection services would occur with implementation of the proposed project. Furthermore, the proposed project would result in positiveimpactsas a result of greatercongestionrelief andincreasedmobility in the vicinity for motorvehiclesincluding emergencyvehicles. hnpactswould besimilar to thoseidentifiedin the 1990Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Police Protection?
Refer to response for Section 3. 14 ( a), above. The proposed project would reduce congestion and traffic idling times, and therefore, increasemobility of emergencyvehicles, including police vehicles. The proposed project would not result in the need or increase the demand for police services in the area.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) Schools?
No schoolswould be impactedby the proposedprojectandno schoolserviceswould be affectedby the proposed project. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Parks?
The proposedprojectis aroadwideningprojectandno park sitewould beacquiredaspart of theproject. No park serviceswould be increasedor impactedby theproposedprojectandno impactwould result from the proposed project. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Other public facilities?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 50 75C - 68

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) The proposed project is an intersection widening project and would not generate demands for public facilities. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 15 Recreation
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsection P, Impact on Recreational Facilities, of the 1990 Final EIS / EIR. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
The proposed project is not a growth- inducing project and would not create demand for recreation services.

Physicaldeteriorationof recreationalfacilities would not resultfrom theproposedintersectionwideningand no impact would result from the project implementation. No mitigation measures are required with regards to recreational resources. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Theproposedintersectionwidening would not requirethe constructionor expansionof recreationalfacilities and no adverse physical impact would be generated. No mitigation measures are required. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 16 Transportation / Traffic
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections U, Impacts to Transportation Facilities, and V, Construction Impacts of the 1990 Final EIS / EIR. a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measuresof effectivenessfor the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non - motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit.

The Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV project is consistentwith the applicable plans, ordinancesand policies establishingmeasuresof effectivenessfor theperformanceof the circulation systemasdescribedin the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. The widening of Bristol Street was designated in the Orange County Master 'Plan, and was recommended in the Bristol Street Corridor Study — Final Report by Mohle, Grover & Associates in 1983. It was alsorecommendedin the Arterial Highway Element — SantaAna Element — SantaAna Transportation Corridor StateII Alternative Analysis prepared by ParsonsBrinkerhoff Quade and Douglas, Inc., in 1983.

The proposed widening is also in agreement with the recommendation found in the Intercity Liaison Committee — Five -Year Transportation Study Update to 1990 prepared by Basmaeiyan- Darnell, Inc., in ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 69
51 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAveto SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) 1985. Furthermore, the proposed project would result in an improvement to the Bristol Street at Warner Avenue, Glenwood Place, and Saint Andrew Place intersections. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestionmanagementagencyfor designatedroads or highways? The proposed project would result in an improvement to Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place. Once the project hasbeenimplemented, all roadway segmentswould operateat LOS D or better. The proposedproject would not causethe County congestionagency's LOS standardsto be exceeded. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The closest airport to the site is John Wayne — Orange County Airport, located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the project site. The proposed project would have no impact on air traffic patterns. The proposedproject would not introduceany new risks or increaserisks. Impactswould be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ( e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The proposedproject would improve the traffic flow along Bristol Streetfrom Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place and would not createany sharpcurvesor otherincompatibleuses. The proposedproject wouldnot createanysignificanthazardsbeyondwhatwaspreviouslyanalyzed. Impactswouldbesimilarto those identified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
The proposedprojectwould improvetraffic flow alongBristol Streetin the long -term. However, duringthe construction phase, the disruption of traffic and restricted accessalong Bristol Street could temporarily affectthemobility of emergencyvehicles. Provisionswouldbemadefor interimaccess, andtraffic control plans would be prepared prior to construction. Additionally, advance warning and information signs would be used to reducethe confusion motorists may experienceduring the constructionprocess. Bristol Street would remainopenduringconstruction. Although theproposedprojectmay interferewith emergencyaccess in theshort -tern, it wouldimproveemergencyaccessoncetheprojectis completed. Theproposedproject would not result in a more significant impact to emergency accessthan previously analyzed, and with the implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 70

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Ave to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV) Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decreasethe performance or safety of such facilities? The proposedproject supportsthe useof public transportationandit would not conflict with any alternative transportationplan and would increasesafety. The proposedproject would not result in impacts greaterthan as described in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 17 Utilities and Service Systems
This section corresponds with Section IV, Environmental Consequences and Mitigation Measures, subsections S, Effect on Utilities, and V, Construction Impacts of the 1990 Final EIS / EIR. a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
The proposedproject would not generateany sewer demand and would not change the sewer quality. No impacts are anticipated in this regard.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
The proposed road widening project would not generatethe need for water and wastewater services from the City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency and the Orange County Sanitation District, respectively. The existing sewerand water lines beneathBristol Streetwould not be relocated. The proposedproject would not createanynew significant environmentalimpact. Impactswould be similar to thoseidentified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The project site is already fully developed and the proposed project would not change the runoff volume significantly. Instead, the proposedproject would improve existingdrainageflow by constructingproperly designedcurb andgutter along the edgesof Bristol Street. Implementationof theproposedproject would not result in anynew significant environmentalimpact. Impactswould be similar to thoseidentified in the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 71
53 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
BristolStreetWideningProjectWarnerAveto SaintAndrewPlace (PhaseIV) d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Theproposedprojectwouldnot resultin anyincreasein waterconsumption. Landscapeimprovements, if applicable, would not requireany new or expandedwaterentitlements. The proposedprojectwould not createanynewsignificantenvironmentalimpact. Impactswouldbesimilarto thoseidentifiedin the 1990 Final EIS / EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project' s projected demand in addition to the provider' s existing commitments?
Theproposedroadwaywideningprojectwouldnot generateanysewerdemands. No newsignificantimpact is anticipated. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project' s solid waste disposal needs?
The proposed project would generate construction waste on a short -term basis. The City has two haulers, Waste Management and Ware Disposal, which provide recycling services for construction and demolition projects. Construction waste that cannot be recycled would be taken to available landfills. The predominant receivinglandfill for the City is the FrankR. BowermanSanitaryLandfill at 11002BeeCanyonAccess Road in Irvine. The landfill, which is owned and operated by the Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department, opened in 1990 and is scheduled to operate until approximately 2022. The facility hasadequatelandfill capacityto servetheproposedprojectandno newsignificantenvironmentalimpact would result from the project implementation. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS/ EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutesand regulationsrelated to solid waste? The proposed project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The proposed project would comply with the City' s established reduction, reuse, and recyclingprograms. No newsignificantsolidwasteimpactwouldresultfromtheproposedproject. Impacts would be similar to those identified in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR.

Mitigation Measures
No new additional mitigation measures are required.

3. 18 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Basedon this Addendum, the Bristol StreetWidening PhaseIV project hasnot substantiallychangedin regardto thesetting, design, impacts, andmitigationmeasuresasdescribedin the 1990FinalEIS /EIR. New ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 54
75C - 72

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM
Bristol Street Widening Project WarnerAve to Saint Andrew Place ( Phase IV) circumstances or new information, including any new or revised environmental laws, regulations, or policies have not modified the impacts of the proposed project.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The proposed project would not result in greater impacts as compared with the 1990 Final EIS / EIR and does not have the potential to degrade the environment, reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, threaten plant or animal communities, reduce or restrict endangered plant or animal species or eliminate important examplesof major periods of California history or prehistory. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Due to the relatively limited nature of the proposed project and in consideration of mitigation measures addressed in the 1990 Final EIS/EIR, the project would not involve impacts that are cumulatively considerable.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Construction - related activities are anticipated to have some minor, temporary impacts, which can be mitigated with implementation of measuresincluded in the 1990 Final EIS /EIR. Furthermore, potential long- term impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels through implementation of required mitigation measures.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 73
55 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTADDENDUM
Bristol Street WideningProject WarnerAve to SaintAndrew Place (PhaseIV)

4. 0 REFERENCES
Air Quality Conformity Analysis — Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place (Phase IV), URS Corporation. January 2013.

City of Santa Ana General Plan, Adopted September 1982 (with updates and reformatting through January 2010).

City of SantaAnaWebsite: www .ei.santa- ana.ca.us.CommunityImpactAssessment — Bristol Street Widening ProjectWarnerAvenueto SaintAndrew Place (PhaseIV), URS Corporation. October 2010.

Relocation Impact Statement — Bristol Street Widening Project Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place Phase IV), URS Corporation. November 2011.

Final Environmental Impact Statement, ProposedWidening of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane, in the City of SantaAna. Wildan Associates. 1990.

Noise StudyReport — Bristol StreetWideningProjectWarnerAvenueto SaintAndrewPlace, URS Corporation. November 2012.

Southern California Association of Governments, Orange County RTIP, Project Listing Report. 2008, www. seag. ca. gov.

Traffic Impact Analysis — Bristol StreetWidening Project Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place, URS Corporation. October 2010.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 56 75C - 74

APPENDIX A MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 75
Modified Initial Study Checklist
Thefollowing Modified Initial Study (MIS) Checklistis basedonthe CaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality Act (CEQA) Initial Study Checklist. It is modified to evaluatethe proposedproject changesfor which environmental impact reports /statements have previously been completed to assist in the determination of the need for supplemental environmental documents, in this case, a Supplemental EIS/ EIR or an Addendum under Public Resources Code 21166andGuidelineSections15162, 15163, and15164. Forpurposesof this study, referencesto "theproposal' in the left hand column questions refer to the proposed project changes.

The first four columns to the right of the MIS questions identify whether the proposed project changes would result in new impacts and if so whether these impacts would be less than significant, less than significant after mitigation, or significant.

The fifth column asks whether or not the impacts associatedwith project changes, if any, were sufficiently disclosed in the previous environmental documents ( Not Addressed).

Finally, the lastcolumn indicateswhetheror not a SupplementalEIS /EIR is needed. A SupplementalEIS /EIR would be needed if there were new significant unmitigated or substantially more severe impacts which would result from the project changesand which werenot sufficiently disclosedin theprevious environmental documents.

Discussion in support of the conclusions indicated on the checklist is provided in Chapter 3 ANA 305 -194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133967 YU
75C - 76
A

MODIFIED INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133967 YU
75C - 77
New Impacts of Project Changes -` PreviousFEIRandFEIS - ess an
Significant
ess an
Significant
otentia VV
Significant pp upppemental EIR/EIS
robsP Impact After Impact DiscloseG? Required?
Mitigation

1. AESTHETICS.

Wouldtheproject:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect X YES NO
on a scenic vista?
b) Substantiallydamagescenic
resources, including, butnotlimited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and X N/A NO
historic buildings within a state
scenichighway?
c) Substantiallydegradethe existing
visualcharacterorqualityofthe site X YES NO
and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of
substantial light or glare, which X YES NO
wouldadverselyaffectdayor
nighttime views in the area?
Z AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES.

Wouldthe project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance ( Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the

X N/A NO
FarmlandMappingandMonitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non- agriculturaluse?
b) Conflictwithexistingzoningfor
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act X NIA NO
contract?
c) Conflictwithexistingzoningfor, or
causerezoning, of, forestland (as
defined in Public Resources Code
section12220(g)), timberland (as
definedby PublicResourcesCode X N/A NO
section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production ( as defined
byGovernmentCodesection
51104(8))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non - X NIA NO
forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the
existingenvironmantwhich, dueto
their location or nature, could result X N/A NO
in conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non - forest use?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133967YU
75C -77
ANA 305 -194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 78
New Impacts of Project Changes Previous FOR and FEIS
ImpactP
Less an
Significant
Less an
Significant PotentiallySignificantDiscPosed?
upppemenl
al EIRIEIS
Impact After Impact`. Required?
Mitigation

3. AIR QUALITY.

Wouldthe project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct

X YES NO
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
b) Violateanyair qualitystandardor X YES NO
contributesubstantiallyto an existing
or projected air quality violation?
c) Resultina cumulatively
considerablenetincreaseofany
criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non - attainment under an X YES NO
applicable federal or state ambient
airqualitystandard (including
releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to X YES NO
substantial pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors
affecting a substantial number of

X YES NO
people?

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.

Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
eitherdirectlyorthroughhabitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive,
X YES NOor special- status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or
regulations, orbythe California
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect
onanyriparianhabitator other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, X YES NO
policies, orregulationsor bythe
California Department of Fish and
Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect
onfederallyprotectedwetlandsas
definedbySection404oftheClean
WaterAct (including, butnotlimited X YES NO
lo, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
throughdirectremoval, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other
means?
ANA 305 -194 ( PER02) CSA ( AUGUST2014) 133867YU
75C -78
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 79
NewImpactsof Project Changes Previous FOR and FEIS
NoImpact
Less I han
Significant
Less I han
Significant PotentiallySignificantImpactsDisclosed? Supplement at EIR/ EIS
Impact After Impact Required?
Mitigation
d) Interferesubstantiallywiththe
movement of any native resident or
migratoryfishorwildlifespeciesor X YES NOwith established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e) Conflictwithany localpoliciesor
ordinancesprotectingbiological X YES NO
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
NaturalCommunityConservation
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or stale habitat
conservation plan?
5, CULTURALRESOURCES.

Wouldthe project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a X YES NO
historical resource as defined In §
15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an X YES NO
archaeological resource pursuant to
15064.5?
c) Directlyor indirectlydestroya
unique paleontological resource or X YES NO
site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturbanyhumanremains,
includingthoseinterredoutsideof X NA NO
formal cemeteries?

6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.

Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects,
includingtheriskof loss, injury, or
deathinvolving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake
FaultZoningMapissuedbythe X YES NO
State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of
MinesandGeologySpecial
Publication 42.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C -79
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 80
NewImpactsof ProjectChanges Previous FOR and FEIS
Impact
Less an
Significant
an
Significant
otentia V
Significant Disclosed?
ulp ement
at EIR/ EIS
Impact After Impact Required?
Mitigation
ii) Strongseismicgroundshaking? X YES NO
iii) Seismic - related ground failure, X YES NO
includingliquefaction?
iv) Landslides? X YES NO
b) Result in substantial soil erosion X YES NO
or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or
soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project, andpotentiallyresultinon- X YES NO
or off -site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the
UniformBuildingCode (1994), X YES NO
creatingsubstantialrisksto lifeor
property?
e) Have soils incapable of
adequatelysupportingtheuseof
septic tanks or alternative waste X NA NO
water disposal systems where
sewers are not availablefor the
disposal of waste water?

7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.

Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, eitherdirectlyor X NO NO
indirectly, thatmayhaveasignificant
Impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policyorregulationadoptedforthe X NO NO
purposeof reducingtheemissionsof
greenhouse gases?

8. HAZARDS,
Wouldthe projectinvolve:
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through X YES NO
the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867YU
75C -80
NewImpactsofProjectChanges .. Previous: FORandFEIS.

No Less I ran
Significant
Less I nan
Significant PpienualSignificant Impacts Su lament
al EIR EISImpact Impact After Impact Disclosed? Required? Mitigation .
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonablyforeseeableupsetand X YES NO
accidentconditionsinvolvingthe
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or
handlehazardousoracutely
hazardous materials, substances, or X NIA NO
waste within one - quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is
included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 X YES NO
and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within
X NIA NOtwo miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project result
inasafetyhazardforpeopleresiding
orworkingintheprojectarea?
f) Fora projectwithinthevicinityofa
privateairstrip, would the project X NIA NO
resultin a safetyhazardfor people
residingorworkingintheproject
area?
g) Impairimplementationofor
physicallyinterferewithanadopted X YES NO
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a
significantriskofloss, injuryordeath
involvingwildlandfires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to X NIA NO
urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with
wildlands?

9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER.

QUALITY
a) Violateanywaterquality X YES NO
standards or waste discharge
requirements?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 81
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 82
New Impacts of Project Changes Previous FEIR and FEIS
NoImpactP
ess I Man
Significant
Less I Man
Significant
PotemiallySignificant ImpactsDisclosed? Icposed?
upppement
al EIWEIS
Impact After Impact Required?
Mitigation
E) Substantiallydepletegroundwater
suppliesor interferesubstantially
with groundwater recharge such that
there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volumeora loweringof thelocal X YES NO
groundwatertablelevel (e.g., the
production rate of pre- existing
nearbywellswoulddropto a level
thatwouldnotsupportexistingland
uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
c) Substantiallyaltertheexisting
drainage pattern of the site or area,
includingthroughthealterationof
the course of a stream or river, in a X YES NO
manner that would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off - site?
d) Substantiallyaltertheexisting
drainage pattern of the site or area,
includingthroughthealterationof
the course of a stream or river, or X YES NO
substantiallyincreasetherateor
amount of surface runoff in a manner
thatwouldresultinfloodingon -or
off - site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water
whichwould exceedthe capacityof
existing or planned storm water X YES NO
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwisesubstantiallydegrade X YES NO
water quality?
g) Placehousingwithina 100 -year
flood hazard area as mapped on a
federalFloodHazardBoundaryor X YES NO
FloodInsuranceRateMaporother
floodhazarddelineationmap?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood

X YES NO
hazard area structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a
significantriskof loss, injuryordeath
involvingflooding, includingflooding X YES NO
as a result of the failure of a levee or
dam?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER02) CSA ( AUGUST2014) 133867YU
75C -82
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 83
New Impacts of Project Changes PreviousFEIRandFEIS
Less : an
Significant
Less an
Significant PotentiallySignificant Supplement
atEIRIEIS
Impact Impact After Impact Discosed? Required? '
Mitigation
j) Inundationbyseiche, tsunami, or X N/A NO
mudflow?

10. LANDUSEANDPLANNING.

Wouldthe project:
a) Physicallydivideanestablished X N/A NO
community?
b) Conflictwithanyapplicableland
use plan, policy, or regulation of an
agencywithjurisdictionoverthe
project (including, butnotlimitedto
the general plan, specific plan, local X YES NO
coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflictwithanyapplicable
habitat conservation plan or natural X N/A NO
community conservation plan?

11. MINERAL RESOURCES. -
Wouldtheproject:
a) Resultinthelossof availabilityof
a known mineral resource that would X YES NO
be of value to the region and the
residents of the stale?
b) Resultinthelossof availabilityof
alocally- importantmineralresource
recoverysitedelineatedonalocal X YES NO
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?

12. NOISE.

Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or
generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local X YES NO
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or
generation of excessive X YES NO
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase
In ambient noise levels in the project X YES NO
vicinityabovelevelsexistingwithout
the project?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867YU
75C -83
ANA 305 -194 (PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 10
75C - 84
NewImpacts of Project Changes Previous FOR and FEIS
Impact
Less an
Significant
Less an
Significant PotentiallySignificantDisclosed?
uppp ement

EIR/ EIS
Impact After Impact Required? Required?
Mitigation
d) A substantialtemporaryor
periodic increase in ambient noise X YES NO
levelsin the projectvicinityabove
levelsexistingwithoutthe project?
e) For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public X N/A NO
use airport, would the project expose
peopleresidingorworkinginthe
project area to excessive noise
levels?
f) For a projectwithinthevicinityof a
privateairstrip, wouldtheproject X N/A NO
exposepeopleresidingorworkingin
the project area to excessive noise
levels?

13. POPULATION AND HOUSING..

Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population
growthinanarea, eitherdirectly (for
example, byproposingnewhomes X YES NO
andbusinesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads
or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existinghousing, necessitatingthe X YES NO
constructionof replacementhousing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of
people, necessitatingthe X YES NO
constructionof replacementhousing
elsewhere?

14. PUBLIC SERVICES.

Wouldthe projectresultin substantial
adverse physical Impacts associated
with the provisionof new or physically
alteredgovernmentalfacilities, needfor
neworphysicallyalteredgovernmental
facilities, the constructionof which could
cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performanceob'ecllvesfor anyof the
a) Fire protection? X YES NO
b) Police protection? X YES NO
c) Schools? X YES NO
ANA 305 -194 ( PER02) CSA ( AUGUST2014) 133867YU 10
75C -84
Appendix A
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 85
New Impacts of Project Changes Previous FOR and FEIS
No ess inan
Significant
Less I man
Significant Potentially . Significant Impacts upppement al EIRIEISImpact Impact After Impact: Disclosed? Required..

Mitigation
d) Parks? X YES NO
e) Other public facilities? X YES NO

15. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the
use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational

X YES NO
facilities such that substantial
physicaldeteriorationofthefacility
would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of X YES NO
recreational facilities that might have
an adverse physical effect on the
environment?

16. TRANSPORTATIONIfRAFFIG.

Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation
system, takingIntoaccountall
modesoftransportationincluding X YES NO
mass transit and non - motorized
travel and relevant components of
thecirculationsystem, includingbut
not limited to intersections, streets,
highways and freeways, pedestrian
and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable
congestion management program,
including, butnotlimitedto levelof
service standards and travel demand X YES NO
measures, or other standards
establishedbythecounty
congestionmanagementagencyfor
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic
patterns, includingeitheranincrease X NO NOin traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantiallyincreasehazards
duetoadesignfeature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections)

X YES NO
orincompatibleuses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) CSA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C -85
ANA 305 -194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU 12
75C - 86
New Impacts ofProject Changes. Previous FOR and FEIS
No. ImpactP ess an
Significant
Less an
Significant PotentiallySignificantImactsDisclosed?
upppement
al EIR/ EIS
Jmpact After Impact Required?
Mitigation
e) Resultin inadequateemergency X YES NO
access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies,
plans, or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, or pedestrian X YES NO
facilities, or otherwise decrease the
performance or safety of such
facilities?

17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS.

Would the ' ect
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable X YES NO
RegionalWaterQualityControl
Board?
b) Require or result in the
construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or X YES NO
expansionof existingfacilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the
construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of X YES NO
existingfacilities, theconstructionof
which could cause significant
environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, X YES NO
or are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
e) Resultina determinationbythe
wastewater treatment provider which
servesor mayservetheprojectthat
it hasadequatecapacitytoservethe X YES NO
project' s projected demand In
additionto the provider's existing
commitments?
f) Beservedbya landfillwith
sufficientpermittedcapacityto X YES NO
accommodate the project' s solid
waste disposal needs?
g) Complywithfederal, state, and
local statutes and regulations related X YES NO
to solid waste?
ANA 305 -194 ( PER02) USA ( AUGUST2014) 133867YU 12
75C -86
Appendix A
ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C - 87
New Impacts of Project Changes PreviousFORandFEIS .

No ess I : an
Significant
Less I ham
Significant
Potentiall
SignificantOisclosed? impacts upppement—
al EIRIEISImpact Impact After Impact Required?
Mitigation

18. MANDATORY

FINDINGSOF
SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the
potentialto degradethequalityof
the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
populationto dropbelowself -
sustaininglevels, threatento X YES NO
eliminate a plant or animal
community, reducethenumberor
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
majorperiodsof Californiahistoryor
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts
thatare individuallylimited, but
cumulatively considerable?
Cumulativelyconsiderable" means
that the incremental effects of a

X YES N
project are considerable when 0
viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have
environmental effects which will X YES NO
cause substantial adverse effects on
humanbeings, eitherdirectlyor
Note: NIA = Not applicable

19. EARLIER ANALYSES.

Earlieranalysesmaybeusedwhere, pursuanttothetiering, programEIR, orotherCEQAprocess, oneormoreeffectshavebeenadequately analyzedinanearlierEIRornegativedeclaration. Section15063(c)(3)(D). Inthiscaseadiscussionshouldidentifythefollowingonattached sheets:
a) Earlieranalysesused. Identifyearlieranalysesandslatewheretheyareavailableforreview. b) ImpactsadequatelyaddressedIdentifywhicheffectsfromtheabovechecklistwerewithinthescopeof andadequatelyanalyzedinanearlier documentpursuanttoapplicablelegalstandards, andstatewhethersucheffectswereaddressedbymitigationmeasuresbasedontheearlier analysis.

ANA 305 - 194 ( PER 02) USA ( AUGUST 2014) 133867 YU
75C -87
75C - 88
ROH — 04/ 07/ 15
RESOLUTION NO. 2015 - xx

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA

APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT / ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 89 -01 FOR THE

BRISTOL STREET WIDENING PROJECT BETWEEN WARNER AVENUE

AND SAINT ANDREW PLACE ( PHASE IV)

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Councilof the City of Santa Ana herebyfinds, determines and declares as follows:

A. On November 19, 1990, the City Council approved the Final Environmental Impact Statement / Environmental Impact Report ( EIS 89 -01) for the widening of a 3.9 -mile segment of Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Memory Lane, hereinafter referred to as the "Project".

B. City Council has been asked to approve the commencement of Phase IV of the Project, widening Bristol Street from Warner Avenue to Saint Andrew Place. Phase IV includes minor design modifications to the Project approved in EIS 89 -01.

C. On April 7, 2015, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana considered the request for approval of the Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Study / Environmental Impact Report (EIS 89 -01).

Section 2. The City Council previously approved and adopted Final Environmental Impact Study / Environmental Impact Report ( EIS 89 -01). In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), an Addendum to EIS 89 -01 was prepared for Phase IV of the Bristol Street Widening Project. A true and correct copy of the Addendum is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference.

The City Council reviewed the information contained in the Addendum, which includes reference materials, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference, and as a result of its consideration and the evidence presented at the hearings on this matter, determined that, as required pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the Addendum adequately addresses the expected environmental impacts of this Project.

Based upon the studies, the City Council determines that there are no new significant impacts or any increases in the severity of the impacts previously identified in the original FEIS / EIR.

Resolution No. 2015 -

Page 1 of 3 ends

75C - 89
Section 3. The City Council hereby certifies and approves the Addendum to EIR 89 -01, and directs that any necessary Notice of Determination be prepared and filed with the County Clerk of the County of Orange in the matter required by Law.

Section 4. These decisions are based upon the Request for Council Action dated April i, 2015, and exhibits attached thereto; the public comments; and, the Final Environmental Impact Study / Environmental Impact Report ( EIS 89 -01), all of which are incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 5. This decision rendered by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana is final and is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094. 8.

ADOPTED this day of April, 2015.

Miguel A. Pulido
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Sonia f arvalhp, CityAttorney
M
li
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
Resolution No. 2015 -

Page 2 of 3 ends

75C - 90

CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, MARIAD. HUIZAR, ClerkoftheCouncil, do herebyattesttoandcertifytheattached ResolutionNo. 2015 -XXXto betheoriginalresolutionadoptedbytheCityCouncilofthe City of Santa Ana on
Date:

Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
75C - 91
Resolution No. 2015 -

Page 3 of 3 ends

75C - 92

EXHIBITA
Please note that Exhibit A referenced in the resolution is Exhibit 3 of the 75C Staff Report.
75C - 93
75C - 94

Santa Ana City CouncilMarch 4, 2025

Santa Ana City Council
March 4, 2025