CORRESPONDANCE - 60A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

=w uIr wZ 70 3 J W .J Z❑ n 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 46. By approving and certifying the FIR without providing a proper project description, without updating or revising related environmental analyses and mitigation measures, without completing a new initial study for the effects of the changes to the Project, without meaningfully responding to the public comments incorporated by reference herein, and without recirculating the FIR for public comment, Respondents violated CEQA, among other local, state, and federal laws, rules, and regulations. 47. For example, CEQA mandates recirculation of an EIR where significant new information is added after public notice is given, but before certification. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21092.1; see also Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15088.5.) Here, Respondents failed to recirculate the EIR in violation of CEQA. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15088.5.) As a result, the FIR does not adequately evaluate environmental impacts that the Project will have on the surrounding community, including, without limitation, traffic, water quality, air quality, dust control, and other such issues addressed in the public comments incorporated by reference herein. 48. Furthermore, Respondents certified the EIR and granted the other Project approvals despite glaring inconsistencies with the City's General Plan and zoning regulations, in violation of CEQA, the California Government Code, and the Santa Ana City Charter, which incorporates the same either expressly or as a matter of statewide concern. 49. In this case, and as alleged above, the proposed modifications create new, different, or additional environmental impacts that are either unmitigated for in the EIR or entirely unaddressed. The differences between the Initial Plan and the Project give rise to significant new impacts and/or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts. Furthermore, the EIR does not evaluate certain environmental impacts that the Project will have on the surrounding community, including traffic, water quality, air quality, and dust control, and other such issues addressed in the public comment incorporated by reference herein. 50. Petitioner, therefore, requests that this Court issue a peremptory writ of mandate/mandamus directing Respondents to vacate and/or set aside the approvals discussed herein, including the approvals of the FIR and related Entitlements. 4516.101 18560319.1 _10_ VERIFIED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE/MANDAMUS