LWV

DRAFT EIR FOR MARINA HEIGHTS

Haywood Norton, Senior Planner
City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, CA 93933

Dear Mr. Norton:

The League of Women Voters of the Monterey Peninsula has reviewed the draft EIR for the Marina Heights Specific Plan and would like to submit the following comments for your consideration.

  1. Traffic related to transporting demolition debris to landfills is not addressed. Debris from 828 residential units will generate considerable heavy duty truck traffic. The impact of this activity on roads and mobile source emissions should be evaluated. If this analysis is delayed to a later time, additional environmental review may be required.
  2. Estimates of the amount of debris should be provided as well as the impact on local landfills. If the debris is not disposed of locally, mobile source emissions would increase. Emission increases should be estimated.
  3. We note that there is no tree survey. This should be provided as soon as possible, and the public review period extended since this information is important in providing comments on visual and biological impacts.
  4. The proposed project is inconsistent with the recently adopted general plan in many significant ways. The draft EIR should identify these inconsistencies as significant impacts. We also note that amendments to the General Plan would require additional environmental review since the amendments would undermine the assumptions used the environmental document prepared for the General Plan.
  5. The final EIR should include a statement regarding the reasons for choosing the proposed project over the environmentally superior project.
  6. The draft EIR should address the impacts on future residents of prescribed burning on the former Fort Ord and BLM land. Burning will occur over the years, and impacts from smoke exposure can be significant.
  7. The discuss of landfill gas impacts on nearby future residents concludes that the significant impacts would be reduced to less than significant; however, no data are provided to address the effectiveness of the mitigation measures in terms of reducing impacts to less than significant.
  8. The draft EIR states (page 10-4), "...the long-term adequacy of this supply (water) poses a serious concern as a result of the potential for continued salt water intrusion in the groundwater basin." In this regard, requirements of SB221 as chaptered in 2001 are not addressed. While there is no requirement to include this information in the draft EIR, it would be useful to the public and decision makers to have this information included in the final EIR. Specifically, the Government Code requires among other things that the agency responsible for the water system verify a sufficient water supply for the project which is defined as "total water supplies available during normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry years within a 20-year projection that will meet the projected demand associated with the proposed subdivision, in addition to existing and planned future uses, including, but not limited to, agricultural and industrial uses.

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft document.

Sincerely,

Beverly G. Bean, President