3.0 Responses to Comments
no facts, reasonable assumption based on facts or expert opinion based on facts that would require additional analysis. 40-29 The comment states, “No Transportation or Circulation standards are provided for transit facilities: road stop, laybys, stations, signal over-rides, etc. No transit options are provided for safe and convenient mobility. Provide one set of consistent ‘Pedestrian Oriented’ requirements for land use and transportation related facilities and conditions for all subsequent CEQA consideration. Provide revised Original DEIR with updated coordinated and referenced information and tables and recirculate.” The comment provides no facts, reasonable assumption based on facts or expert opinion supported by facts to conclude that the Proposed Alternative would have an impact on transportation or transit services. 40-30 In relation to the plan’s goals of strengthening regional bike routes, the comment states, “No definition of ‘strengthens’ is provided, and no regional, Study Area, or Project Area bicycle routes are provided. No coordination, circulation, or connection is provided for the CASP and the L.A. River or Arroyo Seco for “Future Routes”. “Strengthens” is defined as improvement of bike routes through the Specific Plan area. Figure 4-7 on page 4-29 of the Original DEIR illustrates the extensive bicycle routes network proposed as part of the Specific Plan. As shown on the figure, the Specific Plan includes the extension of the Los Angeles River and Arroyo Seco Bike Paths, with connections being provided to the Los Angeles River bike path on Figueroa Street and Avenue 19, and connections to the Arroyo Seco Bike Path provided at Avenue 19. 40-31 The comment states, “This section and the Transportation Chapter 4 are not crosscoordinated or referenced and thereby provide contradictory statements and appear to be inadequate and incomplete with regard to ‘Complete Streets’ or ‘Complete Mobility’ Provide revised Original DEIR with updated coordinated and referenced information and tables and recirculate.” The comment does not identify “this section” and therefore provides no facts or information upon which to provide more detailed or clarifying information. 40-32 The comment states, “Major highways are not delineated; no Complete Street Stand is provided, transportation goals of this CASP are not stated and applied to the designs, inconsistent use of Light and Local Industrial streets is shown between text and figure (figures take precedence over text in contracts), street parking is not delineated within the Project Area. The Project Description is not coordinated with the Transportation Chapter 4, and neither references the others. No discussion is provided for the Major Highway streets and their relationships to other lower classed street and how they work together and how they relate to the Pass-Through traffic and both Rail/Road transits. No specific standards provided for Light/Local Industrial Streets. For a pedestrian oriented development not to have sidewalks does not adequate provide support for the approach to development. Provide revised Original DEIR with updated coordinated and referenced information and tables and recirculate.”
Cornfield Arroyo Seco Specific Plan FEIR
3-111