My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SR0081147_MANURE MANAGMENET PLAN
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
D
>
DELTA
>
7300
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
PA-1800316
>
SR0081147_MANURE MANAGMENET PLAN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2021 4:01:34 PM
Creation date
10/30/2020 3:01:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
FileName_PostFix
MANURE MANAGMENET PLAN
RECORD_ID
SR0081147
PE
2602
FACILITY_NAME
NAVU FARMS INC
STREET_NUMBER
7300
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
DELTA
City
TRACY
Zip
95304
APN
21302038
ENTERED_DATE
9/11/2019 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
7300 W DELTA
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
TSok
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
98
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
Giuseppe Sanfilippo <br /> San Joaquin County Planning Commission <br /> Re. Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for Use Permit No. PA-1800316 of Ahmed <br /> Hussein (c/o Shack& Company) <br /> February 21, 2020 <br /> Page 7 <br /> applicable requirements, including BMPs, and comply with all applicable requirements (not <br /> just those limited to stormwater infrastructure). The MMRP should require that the applicant <br /> provide proof of such consultation and ongoing proof of compliance with applicable <br /> requirements. <br /> V. The IS/MND Does Not Address Potential Impacts to the District's Water <br /> Conveyance Facilities <br /> As noted in the February 3, 2020 correspondence from the District's engineer,there <br /> appears to be a District owned, operated, and maintained irrigation pipeline that runs along <br /> the south side of the Project boundary. No proposed buildings or other facilities may be <br /> located within the District's easement. The IS/MND and conditions of approval should <br /> clearly state that any work done within the District easement would require an encroachment <br /> permit. <br /> VI. Conclusion <br /> The IS/MND fails to comply with CEQA in a number of respects, and there are <br /> unresolved questions about the Project and its impacts. As a result, the County is not able to <br /> make the required finding for the use permit that"Issuance of the permit will not be <br /> significantly detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or be injuries to the property <br /> or improvements of adjacent properties." (Staff Report,Attachment D,p. 3.) Given these <br /> shortcomings, the County must revise and recirculate the IS/MND for public review prior to <br /> the Planning Commission's consideration of the IS/MND or Project use permit. In particular, <br /> the IS/MND must be revised to identify enforceable mitigation measures with clear <br /> performance standards that can be adopted by the County to ensure that potentially significant <br /> impacts will be clearly avoided or substantially lessened, and a MMRP must be prepared to <br /> ensure that all mitigation is actually implemented, and to document compliance with <br /> mitigation measures. <br /> The District's Board of Trustees are available to discuss the District's concerns. <br /> Please contact me at(916)469-3827 if you have questions regarding these comments. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> Alexis K. Stevens <br /> AKS:mb <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.