2002-077 - Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the Armstrong Ranch Development Project

Home Browse Search

hydrology/water quality, hazards/risk of upset, land use, noise, population and housing, traffic and circulation, public services and utilities, and visual resources. 3.4 Comments on Draft EIR and Responses to Comments Comments on the Draft EIR were received from the following agencies, organizations and individuals: Jim Walker, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Southern California Association of Governments, City of Costa Mesa, City of Irvine, Community Development Department, California Department of Transportation, County of Orange, Planning & Development Services Department, Sandpointe Neighborhood Association, Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County, and the Gas Company. The City evaluated the comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the EIR. In accordance with CEQA, the City prepared written responses describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. As required by CEQA, the City has provided to each of the public agencies that commented on the Draft EIR its responses to the comments received from that agency at least ten days prior to the certification of the Final EIR. The Final EIR provides adequate, good faith and reasoned responses to the comments. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, a lead agency is required to recircnlate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after notice is given, but before certification. The term "information" includes: (i) changes to the'project; (ii) changes in the environmental setting; or (iii) additional data or other information. CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 further provides that "[n]ew information added to an EIR is not 'significant' unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project's proponents have declined to implement." The City has reviewed the comments received and responses thereto as welt as other textual changes and references that have been incorporated into the Final EIR. Since the release of the Draft EIR for public comment, there have been no changes in the project, no changes in the environmental setting, and no additional data or other information that would deprive the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon the project. Therefore, having reviewed the information contained in the Draft and Final EIR and in the administrative record, as well as the requirements under CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 regarding recirculation of draft