75C - PH MORTIMER MIXED USE - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Responses to Comments on the EIR Addendum changes to the project would not result in new or more severe impacts related to air quality or greenhouse gas emissions and includes applicable mitigation measures identified in the 2010 FOR. Response 19 The commenter states that any changes to a project's circumstances or the addition of new substantial information subsequent to the certification of an EIR for a project requires that an agency prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR if the changes are "substantial" and require "major revisions" to the previous EIR. The commenter concludes that the project considered by the 2010 FEIR has undergone significant changes and requires revisions to the 2010 FEIR. As described in Response 1, the project did not require a subsequent or supplemental EIR or negative declaration because none of the conditions (i.e., does not meet CEQA's definition of a "substantial change") described in PRC Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 were met to trigger the need for these documents. Primarily, Section 3, Environmental Impact Analysis, of the Addendum supports the conclusion that changes to the project would not result in new or more severe impacts than those of the approved project previously disclosed in the 2010 FEIR and would not require a major revision to the 2010 FEIR. Therefore, the City is within its discretion to proceed with an addendum as the appropriate environmental document for the project under CEQA. Response 20 The commenter states that an EIR is require because the: (1) project's increase in massing and density and associated zone change and variance are a substantial change from the approved project, and (2) the Addendum failed to include a historic resource analysis. As discussed in Response 13, Section 3, Environmental Impact Analysis, of the Addendum supports the conclusion that changes to the project (e.g., associated zone change and variance) would not result in new or more severe impacts than those of the approved project previously disclosed in the 2010 FEIR and would not require a major revision to the 2010 FEIR. Rather, with approval of the zone change and variance, the proposed project would comply with the setback, parking, landscaping, massing and floor area ratio requirements of the approved TZC. Furthermore, as discussed in Responses 14 and 15, a Cultural Resources Study was conducted for the project in April 2019 in accordance with CEQA and is included as Appendix C to the Addendum. Response 21 The commenter reiterates the conclusion of Mr. Offermann that the project would result in a significant air quality impact related to formaldehyde for residential occupants of the project. The commenter adds that this impact is new when compared to the 2010 FEIR because the science in this area did not exist until 2015 and states that the City violated CEQA by not preparing an EIR to analyze and mitigate this new impact. As described in Response 10, the project would not exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for formaldehyde. The project would be implemented pursuant to existing formaldehyde requirements, as all products manufactured or imported in the United States would be required to meet these regulations. Application of these mandatory regulations would limit the potential of human health and cancer risks and avoid impacts related to formaldehyde. 75C-295