Responses to Late Comments as of October 1, 2024

Home Browse Search

Response to Letter LCC3: Katie Perez, dated September 27, 2024 This comment letter was received after the public review and comment period ended (July 6, 2023, through August 23, 2023). As stated in Section 15088 of the CEQA Guidelines, Lead Agencies are not required to respond to letters received outside of the noticed comment period. However, the following responses have been prepared to provide clarity regarding the environmental concerns that have been raised. Comment LCC3.1: This comment states that the commenter opposes the proposed Project due to the increase in congestion around nearby roadways and the lack of affordable housing within the proposed Project. The comment also states that residents in the Project site would continue commuting elsewhere for work. Response LCC3.1: The comment does not raise a specific issue with the adequacy of the Draft SEIR or raise any other CEQA issue. Draft Supplemental EIR Section 5.1 3, Transportation, details that Senate Bill (SB) 743 changes include the elimination of auto delay, LOS, and similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as the basis for determining significant impacts. As part of the 2019 amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines, SB 743 directed that the revised CEQA Guidelines "shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses" (Public Resources Code Section 21099[b][1 ]); and that "automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment" (Public Resources Code Section 21099[b][2]). As such, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(2), the Supplemental EIR focuses on analysis of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) criteria and improvements to the circulation system along the Project's frontage to accommodate buildout of the proposed Project, pursuant to the City's recent General Plan Update. Further yet, the Supplemental EIR is not required to analyze impacts related to traffic congestion. Nevertheless, a Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared for the Project and is publicly available on the City's Project website. This comment will be forwarded to all decision makers as part of the staff report for the Project. In regard to the affordability of the residential units within the proposed Project site, CEQA is an environmental protection statute that is concerned with physical changes to the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15358(b)). The environment includes land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance (CEQA Guidelines Section 15360). The Project's potential economic and social effects are not considered effects on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(e) and 15131(a)). Thus, consistent with CEQA, the Draft Supplemental EIR includes an analysis of the Project's potentially significant physical impacts on the environment and does not include substantial discussion of the Project's economic or social effects. Because no environmental impacts related to the affordability of the residential units would occur, mitigation measures are not required. Comment LCC3.2: This comment states that the proposed Project would not be useful in addressing the City's homeless problem as there are no affordable housing units proposed. Response LCC3.2: This comment does not provide substantial evidence of a significant environmental impact. The Project site has been designated as a District Center by the City of Santa Ana General Plan where intense mixed -use development is encouraged. As discussed in Section 5.8 Land Use and Planning, of the Draft SEIR, the proposed Project would be consistent with its General Plan designation. The proposed Project would provide housing proximate to local employment centers, commercial retail services and restaurants for onsite residents and employees working nearby. In addition, the proposed Project would provide onsite open space and recreation activities that would integrate into the existing communities around the site. Thus, the redevelopment of the site and change to the area has been planned for by the City. In regard to the provision of affordable units by the Project, the proposed Specific Plan does not include specific requirements for affordable units. However, the proposed Project would result in a residential density of 91 du/ac, which would allow the potential for each proposed residential or mixed -use development to include affordable residential units. Section 3.6 of the proposed Specific Plan describes that the City of Santa Ana has established an Affordable Housing Opportunity and Creation Ordinance (AHOCO) to 98