My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0013675_STAFF REPORT
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
D
>
DELTA
>
7300
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
PA-1800316
>
SU0013675_STAFF REPORT
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2021 4:06:51 PM
Creation date
5/13/2021 3:51:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
FileName_PostFix
STAFF REPORT
RECORD_ID
SU0013675
PE
2625
FACILITY_NAME
PA-1800316
STREET_NUMBER
7300
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
DELTA
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
TRACY
Zip
95304-
APN
21302038, 21302041
ENTERED_DATE
10/6/2020 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
7300 W DELTA AVE
RECEIVED_DATE
10/5/2020 12:00:00 AM
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
EHIntern
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.
/
243
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
t CALIFIA, LLC. <br /> November 19,2020 <br /> Mr.Giuseppe Sanfilippo <br /> San Joaquin County Community Development Department <br /> 1810 East Hazelton Avenue <br /> Stockton,CA 95205 <br /> Subject: County Planning Commission Review of PA-1800316(Proposed Slaughterhouse <br /> at 7300 Delta Avenue,Tracy,CA)- Second Referral of Application and Negative <br /> Declaration <br /> Dear Mr.Sanfilippo: <br /> We first provided comments on this application on February 6,2020 and then again on July 28, <br /> 2020 regarding this proposal. In review of the re-referral by County staff of the site plan and <br /> Negative Declaration,we continue to have significant concerns regarding the proposal and the <br /> appropriateness of a mitigated negative declaration with the information that has been provided. <br /> We note the following issues: <br /> L Lack of Detail in the Initial Study and Odor Impact Analysis:The project description in <br /> the Initial Study continues to be lacking. Specifically,there is an inadequate description <br /> of the environmental setting,the thresholds of significance,and the quantitative and/or <br /> qualitative impacts of the proposed project as it relates to Air Quality,especially for <br /> odors.While the revised project description describes modifications to the proposed <br /> project that may reduce odors such as the storage of manure in an enclosed building, <br /> increase in frequency of being hauled off-site,and animal renderings being placed in a <br /> sealed container,these measures indicate that there are in fact odor impacts but with no <br /> quantification of what these impacts are,nor is there a description of the threshold of <br /> significance in which odor impacts can be analyzed against. The Initial Study fails to <br /> disclose this impact or analyze how the impact is considered"less than significant".The <br /> Initial Study should include the following to be considered adequate: <br /> a. Description of the environmental setting and the purpose of the modifications to <br /> the proposed project; <br /> b. Thresholds of Significance in which odor impacts are analyzed against;and <br /> C. A quantitative and/or qualitative analysis of the proposed project and if necessary, <br /> Mitigation Measures to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than <br /> significant level. <br /> Further,the Initial Study fails to adequately analyze potential significant impacts related <br /> to"substantial emissions(such as those leading to odors)adversely affecting a substantial <br /> number of people"as required by CEQA Guidelines Appendix G,Section III:Air <br /> Quality. <br /> Planning Commission Staff Report, PA-1800316(UP) 151 <br /> Response Letters <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.