80A - TRANSIT ZONING CODE - FEIR - SUPPLEMENTAL - REPONSE TO COMMENTS

Home Browse Search

AttacLutent 1: Reasons for Deu3~iug Transit Zoning Corte Briggs Law Corporation-June 5, 2010 Page2of5 I. Necessary Findings and Sufficiency of the Evidence 1.01. The draft EIR states on page 5-61 that the No Project/Reasonably Foreseeable Development Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative. However, you have not made the fi~zdings z•egz~ired under Public Resources Code Section 21081{a) and {b) to approve the project generakly and as they relate to tkae environmentally superior alternative. 1.02. To the extent that you have attempted to make all findings z•equired under Public Resources Code Section 21081{a) and {b), such findings have not been supported by substantial evidence in the record. 1.03. You have not made all of the necessary findings to support the General Plan Antendntent, Speer fir Plan Amendment, Site Plan Permit, Architectural Permit, Minor Exception Permit, Variance, Conditional Use Permit, Sign Permit or Sign Exceptio~i Fermit. Alternatively, such findings are not supported by substantial evidence. II. Aiz• Quality 2.01 CARB guidelines state that siting sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway should 6e avoided when possible. See Ex. 2X. The proposed project identifies residential uses, a sensitive laid use, next to Interstate 5. 2.02 Mitigation measure MM4.2-7 is not sufficient. The mitigation measure is too vague to be enforceable because the requirement that diesel-powered equipment be retrofitted with after-treatment products only applies "to the extent that they are readily available in the South Coast Air Basin." Mitigation measures MM4.2-8 and -9 suffer the same defect in that they only apply when "readily available" and are "cost effective." 2.03 Mazy of the mitigation measures are designed so that they will not be subject to public scrutiny. For example, mitigation measures MM4.2-7 through -17 all require that the specifications be provided prior to the issuance of the grading permit or building permit, but do not require that the specifications be identified prior to approval of future projects. 2.04 Mitigation measures MM4.2-2 through-6 az•e u~ienforceable because they only say what the contractor "should" do. III. Air Quality-Greenhouse Gas Emissions 3.01 Because the project's cumulative greenhouse gas emission impact is significant, all feasible mitigation measures must be adopted. Many of the mitigation measures proposed are unenforceable. For example, MM4.13-21 calks for "consideration" of installation of solar roofs and MM4.13-22 and MM4.13-24 call for measures to be iznpleznented "where feasible," but do not define "feasible."