SU0006255 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXHIBIT A l Findings for Major Subdivision Application (PA-0600363) 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan,the Master Plan, any applicable Specific Plan,any applicable Special Purpose Plan,the Public Financing Plan, and any other adopted plan adopted by the County. • This finding can be made since the analysis conducted by the Community Development Department(CDD) has shown that the proposed subdivision is F1consistent with all applicable adopted plans. With respect to the General Plan,the consistency review found that the proposed subdivision meets General Plan requirements for orderly and compact development(e.g., compatible siting of land uses, inclusion of residential support services, coordination of land uses with transportation). The project is consistent with General Plan policies since: 1) the infrastructure planned meets the requirements and standards of the County and the Mountain House Community Services District(MHCSD); 2) all necessary on-site and off- Fig' easements and dedications for the maintenance of the water, sewer, and storm systems shown on the proposed Tentative Map will be provided; 3) the F1, waste management requirements of the County and the MHCSD will be met; 4) energy resources will be conserved and air pollution minimized by means of participation in adopted plans (e.g.,TDM Plan); 5)transportation improvements adequate to serve the proposed project will be constructed; and 6) programs 4 and actions will be implemented to ensure that riparian habitat and wetlands that are to be removed will result in wetland and riparian habitat values that are superior to those that would be lost. In addition to the above,the following findings (as specified by Policy VI, G,6 of the General Plan) can be made in the affirmative concerning the loss of wetlands and habitat on the project site: 1) no suitable alternative site exists for F1, the land us, and the use is considered necessary for the public; 2)there is no degradation of the habitat or numbers of any rare,threatened, or endangered �- plant, or animal species as a result of the project; and 3) habitat of superior 'l quality and superior or comparable quality will be created or restored to compensate for the loss. With respect to the first finding ("no suitable alternative site exists for the land us, and the use is considered necessary for the public")the rationale is as follows: No suitable alternative site exists for the proposed project. The project site Is part of the Mountain House New Community Master Plan area and is _ designated and is designated for the development of approximately 4.2 residential dwelling units per acre in Mountain House Specific Plan Ill. As discussed in the environmental impact report("EIR")for Specific Plan III, there are no reasonably available and suitable alternative sites for the development contemplated In Specific Plan 111, because alternative sites E i � 1 k