SU0007300 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Munn&Perkins Quarry Excavation Perr1111 13c1i�rc "Ipproving a project RW "llkh a certified l foal FIR has identified significant environmental eflecu. the lead agency must make one or moire specific written findings for each of the identified significant incl,acts. These findings include and are limited to the following: 1 . Changeti or alterations hate been required in. or KcaTorated into, the projcct that aN°oid or substantially lcmen ihc: significant cndronmcntal effect as identified in the Final AIR. �. Such changes or alternations are "Ahin the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency, and not the agave; making the find&& Such changes have been adopted b� such other au�ency or cern and should be adopted b� such other agency. 3. Specific cconorrtic, lczgal. sztci rl, techw5gical or other considerations, including prcn khri of employ ment opportunities for higl ly trained workers_ make infeasible the mitigation inuasures or project Aternnikes identified in file final EIR (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(x)). If there remain significant environmental cffccW even AM the adoption of all feasible mitigation Ineasnt'es or alternatives- the agency must adopt a --statement of overriding considerations'"' before it call procecd with the projcct. The state€none of over6ding cortsidemOon must be supported by Substantial. evidence in the record (C'EQA (..iuidelines. Sections 15092 and 15093). Thcsc ov oWding considerations include the ecce€nnmic. legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the proposed. prc7ject. The lead ag.!ncv mum balance these potential benefits against the projccls trnmuklablc env€ronmahal risks "hen determ nfrig mfiether to approve the project. If the specif-ic economic. lcg,al.social.teehnological, or other benefits ol'a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable .� aclvcrse environmental effects- the lead agency may c:onsrder the adverse environmental impacts to be "a.cceptab)c°' (CEQA Chridclir , Section 150930A 'Mese bandits should be set Forth in the statement ofovvrridWg c:onsiderat&nk and may be Based on the FOM EAR and/or other information in the record of proceedings (CINIA Guidelines. Section 15093(b)). Notably- the CaPAwnia Supreme Court- reflecting on this tnnl?gep process for considering projecl �... impacts and Wells. hers stated that, -Mhe wisdom ofapp-oving.any development project.ar delicate task Willi requires a haNrcing of interests, is ndecssarily left to the sound discretion of the local officir.tls and their constituents a ho are responsible for such decisions. "the law-as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed. and therefore balanced.. (sce Citi.Tcas ref I rrllcy r. faoartl o/':S'trj�cvv[soio (1990) 52 Cal-3d 553, 576). 1 .2 CEQA Final EIR Process Priori to the release of to WR IAR. An .Ioa phn County (head Agency) issued a Notice of preparation (NOP) for a 30-day comment period between January 26, '_01 1 and February 27. 2011. The cnvironmenta+l issues raised during the soaping process were considered in the Draft EIR. he Draft I:IR for the Munn SO Perkins („)emery Excavation Permit was submitted to the State: Clearinghouse (SCI V 2005082001) on May 9. 201 1. A second public notice was issued on Jule 11, 201 1. Hie Imblic review and comment period for the Draft EIR concluded nn August 22-2011. The CEQA Guidelines (Section 151.32) specify that the l`inad EIR shall consist of: W .,&Peiki:W owl E...,daa n Wz 1r �-2 ESA 1 21 106� i' in--i Fnv ro,merdal 1Report SParaMw 2Q'I