SU0013451 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

VII. PUBLIC HEARING ON SUPPLEMENTAL STUDIES —JANUARY 13, 1993 E1: It is difficult to mitigate the immitigable. This issue must be considered by the Board of Supervisors when making a decision on the proposed project. E2: If the lakes are left in their natural condition to dry without being drained, they are permanent seasonal wetlands. E3: Refer to Mokulmne River Alliance response D133. E4: Refer to Mokulmne River Alliance response D127. E5: Refer to Mokulmne River Alliance response D127. The DEIR discusses the loss of trees and understory with the clearing for the fairways. E6: This information is noted and the EIR has been expanded to discuss the conflicts of the mitigation measures. Also refer to C.U.M.E. response D9. E7: Comment acknowledged. See Response D5. E8: The EIR consultant conducted new studies in those areas already identified as being significant, as well as specified residential lot locations (see pg. 13, and Map 6). E9: The EIR consultant has modified their recommendations to accommodate the number of comments aimed at this issue. See response D4 and change in text (p. 37). E10: The EIR consultant believes that the recommended avoidance/protection measures for the sites adequately ensure their preservation for future generations. The comment regarding the lack of assessment of site significance is acknowledged. Site evaluation was not provided for in the scope-of-work as determined by Robertson Homes. Ell: Refer to CDFG response B7. E12: Refer to CDFG response B3 and Delta Sierra Group response D20-D21. E13: Refer to Delta Sierra Group response D20-D21. E 14: Refer to CDFG response B5. E15. Commenter should refer to the discussion of water resources in Chapter 4.6. E 16: Refer to CDFG responses B7-B9. E17: The EIR has discussed the various sensitive habitats which coincide with Figure 4.7-1. E18: Refer to CDFG response B13. E19: These are statements of opinion and require no additional response. E20: Comments noted. VII-7