Item 41 - Amendment Application No. 2022-01 and Appeal Nos. 2022-01 and 2022-02

Home Browse Search

Comment on Garry Avenue Business Park Project Planning Commission Agenda Item 2 (Amendment Application No. 2022-01; Conditional Use Permit No. 2022-14) October 10, 2022 Page 2 of 7 determination fails to provide evidence to support the Exemption Checklist's findings that the Project will not involve environmental effects that: (1) Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located, (2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan or community plan with which the project is consistent, (3) Are potentially significant off -site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action, or (4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR. As evidenced by the expert comments submitted by environmental consulting firm Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise ("SWAPE"), additional environmental review is required because: (1) there are project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site, and (2) the Project would result in any new significant effects not discussed in the GPU EIR. SWAPE's comment and curriculum vitae are attached as Exhibit A hereto and are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. Since the Project is not exempt from CEQA, an initial study must be prepared to determine the appropriate level of CEQA review required. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project proposes to demolish 105,558-square-feet ("SF") of office space and construct 81,500-SF of warehousing and distribution space, 10,000-SF of office space, and 145 parking spaces on the 5.2-acre site in the City of Santa Ana, California. LEGAL STANDARD The EIR is the very heart of CEQA. (Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.AppAth 1184, 1214 ["Bakersfield Citizens"]; Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.AppAth 903, 927 ["Pocket Protectors"].) The EIR is an "environmental `alarm bell' whose purpose is to alert the public and its responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached the ecological points of no return." (Bakersfield Citizens, 124 Cal.AppAth at 1220.) The EIR also functions as a "document of accountability," intended to "demonstrate to an apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and considered the ecological implications of its action." (Laurel Heights Improvements Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 392.) The EIR process "protects not only the environment but also informed self-government." (Pocket Protectors, 124 Cal.AppAth at 927.) An EIR is required if "there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before