Laserfiche WebLink
Local Guidelines for Implementing the <br />California Environmental Quality Act (2019) INITIAL STUDY <br /> <br />(a) Whether the Initial Study and/or any comments received informally during consultations <br />indicate that a fair argument can be made that the project may have a significant adverse <br />environmental impact that cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Even if a fair <br />argument can be made to the contrary, an EIR should be prepared; <br />(b) Whether both primary (direct) and reasonably foreseeable secondary (indirect) <br />consequences of the project were evaluated. Primary consequences are immediately <br />related to the project, while secondary consequences are related more to the primary <br />consequences than to the project itself. For example, secondary impacts upon the <br />resources base, including land, air, water and energy use of an area, may result from <br />population growth, a primary impact; <br />(c) Whether adverse social and economic changes will result from a physical change caused <br />by the project. Adverse economic and social changes resulting from a project are not, in <br />themselves, significant environmental effects. However, if such adverse changes cause <br />physical changes in the environment, those consequences may be used as the basis for <br />finding that the physical change is significant; <br />(d) Whether there is serious public controversy or disagreement among experts over the <br />environmental effects of the project. However, the existence of public controversy or <br />disagreement among experts does not, without more, require preparation of an EIR in the <br />absence of substantial evidence of significant effects; <br />(e) Whether the cumulative impact of the project is significant and whether the incremental <br />Section 11.14) when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, current <br />projects, and probable future projects. The City <br />incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the <br />project will comply with the requirements in a previously approved plan or mitigation <br />program (including, but not limited to, water quality control plan, air quality attainment <br />or maintenance plan, integrated waste management plan, habitat conservation plan, <br />natural community conservation plan, plans or regulations for the reduction of <br />greenhouse gas emissions) that provides specific requirements that will avoid or <br />substantially lessen the cumulative problem. To be used for this purpose, such a plan or <br />program must be specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over <br />the affected resources through a public review process. In relying on such a plan or <br />program, the City should explain which requirements apply to the project and ensure that <br /> <br />(f) Whether the project may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an <br />archaeological or historical resource. <br />The City may use a threshold of significance (as that term is defined in State CEQA <br />Guidelines section 15064.7) to determine whether a project may cause a significant <br />environmental impact. When using a threshold of significance, the City should briefly explain <br />Compliance with the threshold, however, does not relieve the City of the obligation to consider <br />substantial evidence indi <br /> <br />2019 City of Santa Ana Local Guidelines 5-5 ©Best Best & Krieger LLP <br /> <br />