SU0014674 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process. The decision making body shall adopt the proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration only if it finds on the basis of the whole record before it(including the initial study and any comments received), that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis. Statement of Fact: The County finds that it has considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and comments received. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the County's independent judgment and analysis. The County finds that the 1994 Master EIR is adequate for use by the County for the Neighborhood F Project. The County finds that there are no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the 1994 Master EIR was certified and/or that there is no new available information which was not known and could not have been known at the time the 1994 Master EIR was certified. The County finds that earlier mitigated negative declarations based on the 1994 Master EIR, including the mitigated negative declaration prepared and certified for the wastewater use permit, addressed and mitigated some of the environmental effects raised by the comments. The County finds that, based upon the record of this proceeding,that there is no substantial evidence that the Neighborhood F Project will have a significant environmental effect on the environment. In making this finding the County finds that the comments received did not contain evidence that: (a)there are significant environmental effects that were not addressed by the 1994 Master EIR; (b) significant environmental effects addressed in the 1994 Master EIR are substantially more severe; (c) mitigation measures or alternatives that were found to be infeasible in the 1994 Master EIR are now feasible; or, (d)there are mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different that the mitigation measures or alternatives discussed in the 1994 Master EIR that would substantially lessen or reduce one or more significant environmental effects. The County finds that, based upon the record of this proceeding, there is not a fair argument based upon substantial evidence that the Neighborhood F Project may have a significant environmental effect that has not been mitigated in either the 1994 Master EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration. In making this finding the County finds that the comments did not raise significant environmental effects that were not addressed in the 1994 Master EIR. In the alternative, if it is determined that the comments raised significant environmental effects that were not addressed in the 1994 Master EIR,then mitigation measures imposed by the Mitigated Negative Declaration reduce such environmental effects to less than significant. The County finds that Mitigated Negative Declaration contains a mitigation monitoring program as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. 32