SU0012821 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Item No. 1 PC: 11-5-92 SU-91-15 REFERRALS AND REPLIES Application referrals were mailed on September 10, 1992, with responses requested by September 25, 1992. De artment of Public Works (responses: 9-22-92, 9-30-92, & 10-27-92): See 'Traffic/Circulation' and 'Conditions of Approval.' Public Health Services (response: 7-3-92): In response to the application referral for the full application, the Environmental Health Division indicated that its earlier comments given at the pre-application review would still be appropriate. See 'Conditions of Approval.' Air Pollution Control District (response: 9-22-92): The District's letter referred to the EIR's conclusion that the project would result in significant, unavoidable, adverse impacts related to air quality. The District stated that the specified mitigation measures should be included in the Conditions for the project if it is approved. See'Conditions of Approval,' "Findings of Significant Environmental lmpact,' and 'Statement of Overriding Considerations.' Mosquito Abatement District (response: 6-18-92): The District's pre-application comments are applicable to the full application. See 'Conditions of Approval.' State Dwartment of Fish and Game (response: 9-28-92): The Department indicated that the mitigation measures identified by the project's EIR should be implemented. See 'Conditions of Approval.' Office of the Sheriff-Coroner (response: 9-22-92): The memo from the Sheriff's Office stated that the project would have a significant impact on the provision of law enforcement service in the Lockeford area. The Sheriff's recommended Crime Prevention Concepts handout has been provided to the developer of the project. CountV Parks and Recreation (responses: 9-17-92 & 10-15-92): See 'Park Site' and 'Conditions of Approval." Mokelumne Fire District (response: 7-9-92): The District's pre-application comments are applicable to the full application. See 'Conditions of Approval." -26- L