75C - PH MORTIMER MIXED USE - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4th and Mortimer CEQA Addendum October 12, 2020 Page 10 of 15 Once the Project is built, emissions will begin at levels that pose significant health risks. Rather than excusing the City from addressing the impacts of carcinogens emitted into the indoor air from the project, the Supreme Court in CBIA expressly finds that this type of effect by the project on the environment and a "project's users and residents" must be addressed in the CEQA process. The Supreme Court's reasoning is well-grounded in CEQA's statutory language. CEQA expressly includes a project's effects on human beings as an effect on the environment that must be addressed in an environmental review. "Section 21083(b)(3)'s express language, for example, requires a finding of a 'significant effect on the environment' (§ 21083(b)) whenever the 'environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly."' CBIA, 62 Cal.4th at 800 (emphasis in original). Likewise, "the Legislature has made clear —in declarations accompanying CEQA's enactment —that public health and safety are of great importance in the statutory scheme." Id., citing e.g., §§ 21000, subds. (b), (c), (d), (g), 21001, subds. (b), (d). It goes without saying that the thousands of future residents and employees at the Project are human beings and the health and safety of those workers is as important to CEQA's safeguards as nearby residents currently living near the project site. The Addendum fails to disclose, analyze, or mitigate these new significant impacts. Because Mr. Offermann's expert review is substantial evidence of a fair argument of a significant environmental impact to future users of the project, an EIR must be prepared to disclose and mitigate those impacts. 2. The Project Will Have Significant Impacts Due to Inconsistencies with the Planning and Zoning Code. The proposed Project exceeds massing and density allowed by the zoning code. Urban Neighborhood zone (UN-2) allows single-family, duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes, courtyard housing and rowhouses. The Project is much more intense than quadplexes. UN-2 does not permit Lined Block buildings, such as the Project. (Addendum 2-11). The Project requires a variance for massing since Zoning Code section 41-2023 requires floors 3-5 may occupy no more than 85% of ground floor, but the Project proposes 100% coverage. (Addedum 2-11). The UN-2 zone allows density up to 50 dwelling units per acre, but this Project has 54 DU/acre. (Addendum 3.6-5). These inconsistencies with the zoning code and zoning designations are significant impacts under CEQA that must be analyzed and mitigated in a supplemental EIR. Of course, these impacts were not analyzed in the 2010 EIR since that document assumed that future projects would comply with the designated zoning and land use laws. Where a local or regional policy of general applicability, such as an ordinance, is adopted in order to avoid or mitigate environmental effects, a conflict with that policy in itself indicates a potentially significant impact on the environment. (Pocket Protectors v. Sacramento (2005) 124 Cal.App.4th 903.) Indeed, any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable plans must be discussed in an EIR. (14 CCR § 75C-29