Laserfiche WebLink
CENTENNIAL PARKISANTA ANA COLLEGE PARK REPLACEMENT PROJECT RESPONSE TO COMMENTS <br />CITY OF SANTA ANA <br />1. Introduction <br />1.3 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COMMENTS AND RESPONSES <br />CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 (b) outlines parameters for submitting comments on negative declarations, <br />and reminds persons and public agencies that the focus of review and comment of MNDs should be "on the <br />proposed findings that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment If the commenter <br />believes that the project may have a significant effect, it should: (1) Identify the specific effect, (2) Explain why <br />they believe the effect would occur, and (3) Explain why they believe the effect would be significant. <br />Comments are most helpful when they suggest additional specific alternatives or mitigation measures that <br />would provide better ways to avoid or mitigate the significant environmental effects. At the same time, reviewers <br />should be aware that the adequacy of an EIR is determined in terms of what is reasonably feasible. ...CEQA <br />does not require a lead agency to conduct every test or perform all research, study, and experimentation <br />recommended or demanded by commenters. When responding to comments, lead agencies need only respond <br />to significant environmental issues and do not need to provide all information requested by reviewers, as long <br />as a good faith effort at full disclosure is made in the EIR. <br />CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 (c) further advises, "Reviewers should explain the basis for their comments, <br />and should submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions based on facts, or expert opinion <br />supported by facts in support of the comments. Pursuant to Section 15064, an effect shall not be considered <br />significant in the absence of substantial evidence." <br />Section 15204 (d) also states, "Each responsible agency and trustee agency shall focus its comments on <br />environmental information germane to that agency's statutory responsibility." Section 15204 (e) states, "This <br />section shall not be used to restrict the ability of reviewers to comment on the general adequacy of a document <br />or of the lead agency to reject comments not focused as recommended by this section." <br />Finally, CEQA does not require a lead agency to conduct every test or perform all research, study, and <br />experimentation recommended or demanded by commenters. When responding to comments, lead agencies <br />need only respond to potentially significant environmental issues and do not need to provide all information <br />requested by reviewers, as long as a good faith effort at full disclosure is made in the environmental document. <br />Page 1-2 PlacelVorkr <br />75C-273 <br />