My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0013451
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
L
>
LAKE FOREST
>
2248
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
WC-90-1
>
SU0013451
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/17/2021 4:00:53 PM
Creation date
6/23/2020 11:17:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0013451
PE
2600
FACILITY_NAME
WC-90-1
STREET_NUMBER
2248
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
LAKE FOREST
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
ACAMPO
APN
00306001
ENTERED_DATE
6/17/2020 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
2248 W LAKE FOREST RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\dsedra
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
1834
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
STATE OF CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON, (rovermr <br /> DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE Y <br /> 1220 N Street <br /> Sacramento, CA 95814 <br /> March 8, 1991 <br /> Kerry Sullivan <br /> San Joaquin Community Development <br /> 1810 East Hazelton Avenue <br /> Stockton, California 95205 <br /> Dear Mr. Sullivan, <br /> Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the forthcoming Draft <br /> Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for Buckeye Ranch (SCH# <br /> 91012103) . This project involves the development of a private <br /> housing community, a golf course, an equestrian center and a nature <br /> preserve on 870 acres. <br /> The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) would <br /> appreciate a discussion of the following issues in the DEIR: <br /> 1. Whether any land under a Williamson Act contract or in an <br /> Agricultural preserve is part of, or near to the planning <br /> area. How will development affect these designations? <br /> 2 . The possible mitigation measures to ensure that agricultural <br /> land is not prematurely or unnecessarily converted to non- <br /> agricultural uses. These measures can include use of the deed <br /> disclosures, a Right-to-Farm Ordinance, phased development, <br /> clustered development, transfer of development rights, and <br /> requiring infill development of vacant land prior to urban <br /> expansion. <br /> 3 . The interface conflicts which can arise from adjacent <br /> agricultural and urban uses. Problems can arise due to noise, <br /> dust, chemical usage, trespassing, and traffic conflicts. <br /> Include any buffering measures (ie. buffers, setbacks, berms, <br /> fencing, etc. ) proposed for the development. <br /> 4 . The pressure this project could create to convert surrounding <br /> agricultural or range land to non-agricultural uses. Does <br /> this project have the potential to be precedent setting? <br /> 5. Whether development of the area will create patterns of <br /> discontiguous growth. If so, is development necessary at this <br /> time? <br /> 6. Given the projected need for residential and urban <br /> development, what is the cumulative impact to agriculture from <br /> this and other projects in the region? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.