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

Home Browse Search

Chapter 12 Responses to Comments Received Since Publication of the t=tnal EIR Response to Comment ~7.01~ The comment states that the City did not respond to comments as required by CEQA Guidelines section 15088(b). Section 15088(b) states that the "lead agency shall provide a written proposed response to a public agency on comments made by that public agency at least 10 days prior to certifying an environmental impact report." Written responses were mailed to each commenter, including public agencies, on May 25th, 2010, more than ten days prior to the June 7, 2010 Joint Session of the Santa Ana City Council and Communityr Redevelopment Agency. A complete set of comments and responses to the comments are also provided in the Final EIR. The City has also complied with all other CEQA requirements for the evaluation and response to comments on the EIR. Chapter 10 of the Final EIR contains written responses on all environmental issues raised in comments received from persons who reviewed the Draft EIR during the noticed comment period from February 2, 2010 to April 12, 2010, and one late comment received on April 13, 2010. Response to Comment ~8.01~ The comment states that the EIR should have been recirculated because significant new information was added and that the report analyzing the additional alternatives was not recirculated until May 22, 2010. Draft EIR Chapter 5 (Alternatives), which analyzed an additional three project alternatives and clarified the project objectives, was recirculated on February 24, 2010. Appendix J, Alternatives Testing: Financial Analyses, was attached to Draft EIR Chapter 5, and recirculated at the same time. All other changes and modifications made to the EIR in response to comments are merely clarifications to the EIR and do not trigger the need for additional public review (Pub. Res. Code ~ 21092.1; CEQA Guidelines X15088.5). Response to Comment ~8.02~ The comment states that the EIR should have been recirculated because the Final EIR identified a significant air quality impact from PMZ, emissions. Significant air qualityT impacts requlrng from PM2~ emissions is not significant new informarion requiring recirculation under CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 because these impacts were identified in the Draft EIR. (Draft EIR Section 4.2.) Impact 4.2-5 identifies PiVZ, 5 as one of the criteria pollutants that would have a significant impact during construction of the project (Draft EIR, Section 4.2.3, pages 4.2-28 through 4.2-33.) PiVI,; was inadvertently left off the list of criteria pollutants included in the Draft EIR discussion of this impact on page 4.2-30, but was clearly analyzed and included in the impact conclusion as evidenced in Table 4.2-7, which includes data, for PM, ~ along with CO, NOX, ROG, SOX, and PM10. The Final EIR was revised to clarify- the text as follows: To the extent drat construction of these individual projects overlaps, then the combined emissions from these small, individual projects could exceed the recommended SCAQ~VID tllresholds, parricularly for CO, NOx, x~PMi~ and PMT.,, for which tl~e Basin is currently in nonattainment. (Final EIR, p. 9-16; double-underline indicates text additions from Draft EIR, strikeout indicates deletions from Draft EIR.) 12-40 City of Santa Ana Transit Zoning Code (SD 84A and SD 84B) EIR