Disney Project Impact Report Clears Hurdle : Planning: Regional planning agency official says draft environmental assessment ‘appears to pass muster.’

Officials with the Southern California Assn. of Governments said Wednesday that the draft environmental impact report on the $3-billion expansion project at Disneyland adequately addressed most of their concerns.

“Looking at the regional aspects of air quality and transportation, (the project) appears to pass muster,” said Glenn F. Blossom, an analyst with SCAG.

Blossom detailed his findings on the draft EIR in a six-page memo to SCAG’s Local Assistance and Compliance Committee. If the committee approves the memo, the comments will be forwarded to Anaheim officials next week as part of the 45-day public review process.

Under this state-mandated process, the draft environmental impact report is made available for public review, comment and criticism. The final EIR must take into account these comments and respond to significant criticisms.

If the city approves the EIR, Disney could move forward on its proposed world-class Disneyland Resort. Current plans for the project include three new hotels, a second theme park called Westcot Center next to the existing Disneyland, an amphitheater, and garden and retail districts. Disney also has its eyes on a third parcel of land for a possible third theme park to be built sometime in the future.

SCAG is one of a number of public agencies reviewing the environmental impacts of Disney’s massive expansion project. SCAG serves as the monitor for determining conformity to regional transportation, housing and environmental policies.

Although SCAG officials said that most of the agency’s concerns are addressed, they made several recommendations to city planning officials, to be considered before the final EIR is approved.

One calls on Disney to further reduce its impact on “transportation demands” by recruiting employees who live locally, having deliveries to the park arrive during “non-peak traffic congestion hours” and offering financial incentive programs for car-pooling and other means of alternative transportation, especially for employees who commute the farthest.

SCAG also asked that it be given an opportunity to review and comment on the plans Disney must submit on how the entertainment company will monitor its programs for reducing impacts from the park on the environment.

Additionally, SCAG asked that Disney be required to meet goals for minimizing impacts on traffic and air quality before work on the future, third theme park begins.

Eric Roth, who is in charge of SCAG’s intergovernmental review, said that the Disney officials had apparently “done their homework” in assisting the city in putting together the environmental report.

“After an extensive review, our fears of this being a regionally unacceptable project are minimal,” Roth said.

He said that SCAG and Disney officials have been working together for the past four or five months to make sure that the project would conform to regional transportation and air quality guidelines.

“It’s been very fruitful time,” Roth said. “They learn from us, what our concerns were. . . . They were very open-minded.”

Although the report addressed regional concerns, Roth said that local jurisdictions might have a different view of the transportation and air quality assessments.

The SCAG report states that “it appears that additional interjurisdictional coordination efforts may be needed in order” to minimize impacts of the project that reach beyond Anaheim.

Officials in Garden Grove have already asked Anaheim planning officials for additional time to review the impacts of the expansion on their city. That request, however, was denied.

Neither Disney nor Anaheim officials could be reached Thursday for comment on the SCAG findings.

The EIR, which is required of the city, was paid for by Disney and written by a group of consultants working for the city.