SU0013451 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I. INTRODUCTION This document has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15132). CEQA Guidelines require that San Joaquin County, after completion of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), consult with and obtain comments from public agencies having legal jurisdiction with respect to a proposed project, and to provide the applicant and general public with an opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR. The County is also required to respond to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process. This Final EIR has been prepared to respond to comments and recommendations received from public agencies and the general public on the Draft EIR for the Buckeye Ranch subdivision. The Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day review in February/March 1992. During the public review of the DEIR, it was determined that additional archaeological work was needed to identify, define and record all known archaeological sites within the project area. This work was completed by Bio Systems Analysis. Because of the necessity to conduct this additional work,additional biological studies were completed through the summer months. With the exception of a halt in field work between early December 1991 and beginning of March 1992,the biological surveys essentially spanned the time segment in Central California when most major biotic activity occurs. With this new biological survey information,Chapter 4.7 of the DEIR has been revised. The supplemental archaeological report and the revised biological study were circulated for a 45-day public review period. Comments on these two documents are found in Chapter V of Volume I. The following section of the Final EIR (Section II) provides a list of persons, organizations and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR. Section III provides a copy of all written comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR and responses to significant environmental points raised in the written comments. A summary of the oral comments made at the public hearing on March 11, 1992 and the responses to those comments are found in Section IV. Section V is a list of commenters on supplemental studies, Section VI contains comments and responses to the supplemental archaeological and biological studies, and Section VII contains the comments of the public hearing on January 13, 1993 and responses to those comments. Volume II of the Final EIR contains the revised EIR based upon information received through the public review process. ` The public review process for both the Draft EIR and the supplemental studies raised many issues specifically related to the cultural and biological resources of the site, protection of a public trust, increased traffic and the appropriateness of the proposed development. 1 I-1