SU0009099 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Recommendations Action It is recommended that the Planning Commission: 1. Find that the 1994 Mountain House Master Plan Final Environmental Impact Report ("1994 MEIR") continues to remain valid and that the Major Subdivision Application PA-1200032 is within the scope of the 1994 MEIR, based on the findings of the Mountain House Town Center Tentative Subdivision Map Initial Study(SCH #1990020776)and the CEQA findings in Appendix B of this staff report; and 2. Approve the Tentative Map for the Town Center(i.e., Major Subdivision Application PA-1200032)with the Findings and Conditions of Approval contained in this staff report. Findings 1 The proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan, the Master Plan, any applicable Specific Plan, any applicable Special Purpose Plan, the Public Financing Plan, and any other adopted plan adopted by the County. • This Finding can be made since the analysis conducted by the Community Development Department (CDD) in Appendix A of this staff report has shown that the proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable adopted plans. 2. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan, the Master Plan, any applicable Specific Plan and any applicable Special Purpose Plan. • This Finding can be made since the analysis conducted by CDD has found that the design or improvements of the proposed subdivision, as shown on the Tentative Map and as described in the project application, meets the requirements of the General Plan, Master Plan, and Specific Plan II. It incorporates a coordinated system of auto, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities that provide efficient access within the project and to commercial and public destinations (e.g., Community Park, Mountain House Creek Community Park). In addition, all landscape, hardscape and street elements within the proposed subdivisions would be designed and constructed in accordance with the adopted MHCSD Design Manual and community approvals regarding specific themes and material variation. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. • This Finding can be made since the analysis conducted by CDD has found that the site is physically suitable to accommodate the commercial and mixed uses proposed. This analysis is based on the improvements proposed; the assessment of the hydrology and water quality of the site; and the use of BMPs (Best Management Practices)for storm drainage improvement. 4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. • This Finding can be made since the analysis conducted by CDD has found that 23