3 - The Bowery_PUBLIC COMMENT_RAMSEY

Home Browse Search

S.0 Executive Summary Avion Project SEIR Page S-3 S.2 Summary of Significant Effects and Mitigation Measures that Reduce or Avoid the Significant Effects Table S-1 summarizes the significant impacts identified through the environmental analysis completed for the project. Table S-1 also identifies the mitigation measures that would reduce and/or avoid the environmental effects as feasible, with a conclusion as to whether the impact would be mitigated to below a level of significance or if impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Further discussion of potential and anticipated environmental impacts is detailed in Chapter 5.0. S.3 Areas of Controversy Pursuant to CEQA Section 15123(b)(2), an EIR shall identify areas of controversy known to the lead agency, including issues raised by the agencies, and the public, and issues to be resolved. The Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the SEIR was distributed on May 24, 2019, for a 30-day public review and comment period. No areas of controversy were raised in the comment letters received on the NOP or during the scoping meeting. The NOP and comment letters received are included in this SEIR as Appendix A. S.4 Issues to be Resolved by the Decision-Making Body The issues to be resolved by the decision-making body (in this case the City Council) are whether: (1) the significant impacts associated with land use, biological resources, cultural resources, and air quality would be fully mitigated to below a level of significance, (2) to approve the proposed alternative instead of the project, and how (3) to reduce significant and unavoidable environmental impacts to the maximum extent feasible while achieving project objectives through adoption of mitigation measures and/or the project alternative identified in this EIR. Furthermore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 would be required for those impacts found to be significant and unavoidable as identified in the EIR. S.5 Project Alternatives The CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires that an EIR compare the effects of a “reasonable range of alternatives” to the effects of a project. The alternatives selected for comparison should be those that would attain most of the basic project objectives and avoid or substantially lessen one or more significant effects of the project. The “range of alternatives” is governed by the “rule of reason,” which requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit an informed and reasoned choice by the lead agency and to foster meaningful public participation (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f]). CEQA generally defines “feasible” to mean an alternative that is capable of being