CORRESPONDANCE - 60A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Honorable Mayor Pulido Santa Ana City Council November 19, 2019 Page 2 The FEIR is insufficient in many ways. The FEIR is legally inadequate because the Project description incorporates significant new information without providing an opportunity for meaningful public review and comment. At the same time, the FEIR still fails to meaningfully address or respond to many of the 163 written comments. Thus, the City Council should take no action on the FEIR, prepare its own, independent EIR, and, at the very least, recirculate the FEIR to allow an opportunity for truly meaningful public comment. If the City certifies this FEIR as -is, it will remain subject to significant challenge. The City may base its decision not to certify the FOR on its failure to comply with standards governing the legal adequacy of EIRs generally. It may also determine that the FEIR is inadequate because revisions to the FEIR are required to respond to changes to the Project, changes in circumstances, or new information arising after the FEIR was completed. At the very least, the FEIR should be recirculated for proper public comment before it is certified. In addition to its written objection to any Project approval, this written comment also serves as PSNA's formal request for written notice in advance of any future meetings regarding the City's consideration of the Project, including, without limitation, the filing of any notice of determination related to the FEIR. THE PROJECT'$ HISTORY, MULTIPLE MODIFICATIONS, AND SOLICITATION OF SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS FOR THEIR SUPPORT. The Project's history, compared to its most current iteration, is quite different from when the Planning Commission first held a public hearing to consider the Applicant's then - proposed 496-unit (84 per acre) development project. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2-3 [discussing Project background and various modifications].) City staff recommended a reduction in development density and denial of the Project as it was then proposed. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2-3.) The City Council agreed and the Applicant modified the Project. (City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2-3.) This cycle continued until the Applicant again informed City staff that it would make further modifications before again seeking to proceed before City Council. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-1-2-3.) The latest modifications have culminated in the present, unrecognizable and rashly considered Project —a far cry from the initial Project as considered and evaluated in the FEIR. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-3-2-4 [modified Project in its current iteration].) The modified Project remains on approximately 5.93 acres of property and would still require the complete demolition of an existing two-story, 81,172 square foot office building. (See City Staff Rept., Oct. 28, 2019, 2-4, Tbl. 1 [project location information]; see also, id. at p. 2-5 [discussing demolition of existing office building].) The intensity of the proposed use and requisite Project construction (demolition of an 3917.101 / 6509864.1