Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br />October 10, 2022 <br /> <br />Via E-mail <br /> <br />Bao Pham, Chair <br />Miguel Calderon, Vice Chair <br />Eric M. Alderete, Commissioner <br />Thomas Morrisey, Commissioner <br />Isuri S. Ramos, Commissioner <br />Mark McLoughlin, Commissioner <br />Alan Woo, Commissioner <br />Planning Commission <br />City of Santa Ana <br />22 Civic Center Plaza <br />Santa Ana, CA 92701 <br />PBAecomments@santa-ana.org <br />Ali Pezeshkpour, Principal Planner <br />Planning and Building Agency <br />City of Santa Ana <br />20 Civic Center Plaza, M-20 <br />Santa Ana, CA 92701 <br />apezeshkpour@santa-ana.org <br /> <br />Re: Opposition Comment on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section <br />15183 Exemption for the Garry Avenue Business Park Project (Amendment <br />Application No. 2022-01; Conditional Use Permit No. 2022-14); Planning <br />Commission Agenda Item 2 <br /> <br />Dear Chair Pham, Vice Chair Calderon, Honorable City Planning Commissioners, and Mr. <br />Pezeshkpour: <br /> <br />I am writing on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility <br />(“SAFER”) regarding the Garry Avenue Business Park Project (Amendment Application No. <br />202201; Conditional Use Permit No. 2022-14), including all actions related or referring to the <br />proposed construction of a 91,500 square foot industrial building, located at 1700, 1720, and <br />1740 East Garry Avenue in the City of Santa Ana (“Project”), which is being heard by the <br />Planning Commission on October 10, 2022 as Agenda Item 2. The City of Santa Ana Planning <br />Division staff have incorrectly determined that the Project is exempt from further environmental <br />review pursuant to Section 15183 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) <br />Guidelines. <br /> <br />After reviewing the Community Plan Exemption Checklist (“Exemption Checklist”) <br />prepared for the Project, as well as the 2022 City of Santa Ana General Plan Update <br />Environmental Impact Report (“GPU EIR”) upon which the Exemption Checklist relies, we <br />conclude that the City’s consistency determination fails to provide evidence that the Project does <br />not require further analysis and mitigation under CEQA. In particular, the consistency