SU0012793 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 52 the City and County General Plan and zone classifications. Agricultural Land Use As discussed above in Introduction,this SEIR updates the discussion of Impact A.2(regarding loss of agricultural land)of the 1994 Elk The other Impacts and Mitigations(A.1,A.3,A.4,A.5,and A.6)of A. Land Use,Plans,and Policies of the 1994 EIR remain unchanged. Impact A.2. The proposed project would convert prime agricultural land to industrial use. As discussed the 1994 EIR,approximately 219 acres of prime County agricultural land(the 125-acre CYA parcel,the 83-acre Brocchini parcel,and the 11-acre Triangular Property)would be converted to landfill use. This would conflict with the County's goals of preserving agricultural land. In addition, although the project would no longer be within the City of Stockton,the current application of the City of Stockton Habitat/Open Space Conservation Fee to most of the project site is an indication of the value placed on agricultural land by the City. Upon project approval,the City of Stockton conservation fee would no longer be legally applicable to the project. For these reasons,the loss of agricultural land would be a significant unavoidable impact. Mitigation A.2. No mitigation measures are feasible. Because no feasible mitigation measures exist,the loss of agricultural land would remain a significant unavoidable impact. Conclusion Changes in General Plan designations and zone classifications resulting from the change of jurisdiction from the City of Stockton to County of San Joaquin would be consistent with land use plans and policies and the impacts would not be significant. ' The proposed project would result in a loss of 219 acres of prime agricultural land. There are no feasible mitigation measures for this loss of agricultural land, and this impact would be significant and unavoidable. GRASS'ETTI ENVIRONMF.NT.4L CONSULTING