Laserfiche WebLink
ti <br /> t <br /> 2.13. In reaching the conclusion that the Map is consistent with the Consistency <br /> Plans, the County considered the Planning Department staff analysis and evaluation of <br /> the consistency of the Map to the Consistency Plans. The County is aware that the <br /> County Planning Department staff by education, training and experience is qualified to <br /> rendered judgments concerning the consistency of subdivision map applications to related <br /> Consistency Plans. The County finds that it is reasonable to rely on the professional <br /> opinion of the County Planning Department staff in reaching the County's independent <br /> conclusion that the Map is consistent with the Consistency Plans. <br /> 2.C. The County Planning Department staff conducted a lengthy consistency <br /> analysis, prepared a comprehensive consistency matrix, and concluded that the Map was <br /> consistent with the Consistency Plans. Therefore, the County Planning Department staff <br /> concluded that the Map was consistent with these Consistency Plans. The County <br /> concludes that this conclusion is evidence to support the fact that the Map is consistent, <br /> and finds that it is reasonable for the County to rely upon the County Planning <br /> Department staff's conclusion when the County reaches its independent finding <br /> concerning the Map's consistency. <br /> 2.D. In addition, the County Planning Department staff report recommended <br /> approval of the Map and found that the Map was consistent with the County plans. <br /> THE DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS <br /> NOT INCONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE GENERAL AND SPECIFIC <br /> PLANS. <br /> 3. The County finds that the design and improvement of the proposed Map is not <br /> inconsistent with the Consistency Plans. In making this finding, the County observes that <br /> the County Planning Department staff conducted a lengthy consistency analysis, prepared <br /> a comprehensive consistency matrix, and concluded that the design and improvement of <br /> the Map is consistent with the Consistency Plans. The County finds that it is reasonable <br /> to rely on the conclusion of the County Planning Department staff in reaching the <br /> County's independent finding that the Map's design and improvements are consistent <br /> with the Consistency Plans. <br /> THE SITE IS PHYSCIALLY SUITED FOR THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT <br /> PROPOSED. <br /> 4. The County finds that the site is physically suited for the type of development <br /> proposed. In making this finding the County observes that the Map is the first <br /> neighborhood map for the Mountain House master planned community. The master plan <br /> has been subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act. The physical <br /> suitability of the site for this project was addressed in the Master Environmental Impact <br /> Report (MSIR). The MEIR's analysis of the physical suitability of the site for this project <br /> was not legally challenged within the time available to make such challenges. Two <br /> 2 <br />