My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES 8 - 2012
Clerk
>
Contracts / Agreements
>
_PENDING FOLDER
>
READY TO DESTROY IN 2017
>
MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES 8 - 2012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2017 12:53:37 PM
Creation date
5/14/2012 2:31:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Contracts
Company Name
MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES
Contract #
N-2012-050
Agency
Planning & Building
Insurance Exp Date
11/1/2015
Destruction Year
2017
Notes
Amended by A-2012-226
Document Relationships
MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES 8A - 2012
(Amended By)
Path:
\Contracts / Agreements\_PENDING FOLDER\READY TO DESTROY IN 2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
October 21, 2011 (rev. March 20, 2012) <br />?iRDN = i <br />E <br />14— — <br />559.497-0310 <br />17— <br />714-5118.4100 <br />Vince Fregoso, Principal Planner Palm Sprint;a <br />City of Santa Ana 76-322..98.7 <br />Planning and Building Agency Sacruacncu <br />P. O. Box 1988 (M-20) 9116-447-1 JIM> <br />Santa Ana, CA 92702 San lA•marJiuu <br />91)9.884.2255 <br />Subject: Additional Services for the Park View at Town and Country Project EIR - Addendum for .,n Ramon <br />Project Design Changes - 925-830-2733 <br />Dear Vince: <br />As follow-up to your e-mail of 10/10/11 and our subsequent discussion, I am outlining a scope of work to <br />complete the EIR to address as yet undefined architectural design changes. The scope and budget <br />augmentation assumes there would be no increases In intensity (FAR) or substantial changes to the <br />building envelope, and no need for recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15088.5. <br />Addendum Approach <br />MBA's proposed approach would be to prepare an Addendum chapter to the previously prepared <br />Responses to Comments/Final EIR that would describe and illustrate the changes to the project design <br />and review the changes in light of previous analysis and findings for Aesthetics/Views/Light and Glare <br />Impacts. The factual basis would be established for a determination that design changes would not result <br />in any significant changes in other impact categories. <br />Due to the lapse in time, there Is some concern that the baseline conditions for the Traffic Impact Study <br />may have changed significantly. MBA's overall Impression, however, is that traffic conditions in the vicinity <br />of the project have remained essentially the same since the TIS and responses to comments were <br />prepared. To verify this we would propose that MBA's traffic consultant conduct new traffic counts at the <br />intersections and roadway segments previously studied. The traffic consultant would also document and <br />verify field conditions and collect such other traffic data as is necessary to supplement the traffic counts. A <br />brief letter of findings would be prepared providing support for reliance upon the previous traffic findings, <br />responses to comments and mitigation measures. <br />The Addendum would be integrated as a chapter of the previous Response to Comments/Final EIR, which <br />would then be made available to all previous commenters on the Draft EIR at least 10 days prior to the <br />next Planning Commission hearing to take action on the project. Note that this approach assumes there <br />would be no need for further written responses to any comments that may be received on the RTC/Final <br />EIR prior to hearings. <br />ENl'IKON\[NN'1':\l.$HK\-'ICF�C PLANNIN60 • \TATUR: 1. Ri+_ ouxcws \t:\N;\c:r•:aucN'r <br />_.bc ,hnan.com <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.