SU0013451 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

L 1. Project ' s Coordinator 2 . Mr. Kerry Sullivan April 3 , 1992 Page Five World. These projects have resulted in the deterioration or loss of riparian, oak woodland, and Swainson's hawk foraging habitat. The cumulative loss of important native habitat is one of the principle reasons for population declines of species like the Swainson' s hawk and the giant garter snake. We do not agree with the Draft EIR's assertion that the A18 cumulative impact analysis should be limited to traffic, noise, and air quality. The Draft EIR must be revised to include an analysis on the project' s cumulative effects on riparian forest, seasonal wetlands, oak savannah, and Swainson' s hawk foraging habitat. 5. The Draft EIR fails to accurately identify the environmentally superior alternative as required by Section 15126 (d) of the CEQA Guidelines. The Draft EIR states that the "no project" alternative cannot be selected -as the environmentally superior alternative because "there is no guarantee that the site can be preserved for its cultural and biotic resources" . The voters of California provided such a guarantee in 1988 when they passed Proposition 70. At that time the project site (Brovelli woods) was identified as an area of great biological significance and moneys were set aside for its purchase and protection. It is arguable that the "no A19 project" alternative would result in a higher level of biotic and cultural protection than the Mitigated Alternative and, therefore, would constitute an environmentally superior alternative. We recommend, therefore, that the Draft EIR be changed to reflect that following passage of Proposition 70, the "no project" alternative is the environmentally superior alternative. The DFG supports a project alternative which results in the least destruction of habitat and disturbance of wildlife. In our opinion, this would at least necessitate deleting the golf course and permanent ponds from the project design. This concludes our review of the Buckeye Ranch Subdivision project. Due to the project' s size and the potential for adverse impacts to wildlife, the DFG opposes certification of the Draft EIR until the issues we have raised are resolved. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092 and 21092 . 2 , the DFG requests written notification of proposed actions and pending decisions regarding this project. Written notification should be directed to this office. III-ll