Fountaingrove Environmental Impact Report - City of Santa Rosa ...

2.0 LIST OF COMMENTERS AND RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
Response to Comment Letter from Fountaingrove Ranch Master Association
(FRMA)
Note: Response numbers correspond to comment numbers labeled in the margin of the
letter, not the commenter’s numbering within the letter.
1) Scoping comments submitted during the scoping period were considered during
preparation of the Draft EIR, as described in Section 1.4 of the Draft EIR. Responses to
the enumerated comments are provided below.
2) Compatibility of the FRPCD Policy Statement (amended 1992) with the General Plan is
outside the scope of this EIR. The Project is consistent with both the General Plan and
the FRPCD Policy Statement, as described in Section 3.9 of the Draft EIR and in Master
Response Land Use Compatibility.
3) Comment noted.
4) The Project is consistent with the General Plan, the Design Review Policy, and
Ordinance 2196, as described in Impact 3.9-1 in the Draft EIR and in Master Response
Land Use Compatibility.
5) The Project is consistent with Ordinance 2196 as described in Impact 3.9-1 in the
Draft EIR and in Master Response Land Use Compatibility.
6) The Project does not include “phasing” or a “Lodge Two.” The Project is consistent with
Design Review Board policies and Ordinance 2196 as described in Impact 3.9-1 in the
Draft EIR and Master Response Land Use Compatibility.
7) Comment noted.
8) Compatibility of the Project with surrounding land uses and the environment of the
neighborhood is determined primarily through the evaluation of aesthetic, noise, and
traffic impacts of the Project. With implementation of mitigation measures, the Project
will not have significant impacts to views, noise, and traffic; see, respectively, Sections
3.1, 3.10, and 3.13 in the Draft EIR. Therefore, the Project will not have a significant effect
on the environment of the neighborhood. In addition, the Project is consistent with
applicable land use plans and policies for the site, as described in Impact 3.9-1 in the
Draft EIR and in Master Response Land Use Compatibility.
9) The Project does not include an “Emerald Isles” or a “Lodge II.” Cumulative effects and
the cumulative scenario analyzed are described in Section 4.1 of the Draft EIR; as
described there, only cumulative traffic impacts to U.S. 101 ramps would be significant;
all other cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
10) See Section 3.1 of the Draft EIR and Master Response Visual Resources. Four computergenerated
simulations of the Project were created to support the visual impacts analysis.
11) The analysis of cumulative impacts is included in Section 4.1 of the Draft EIR; as
described there, only cumulative traffic impacts to U.S. 101 ramps would be significant;
all other cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
12) See response to Comment FRMA-8.
ES092008001PHX\BAO\082970001 2-59