SU0008325 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission San Joaquin Count} Re: Comments on LoN e's Travel Stop Draft EIR December 20, 2012 Page 3 of 3 whether those jobs would be temporary or permanent or full time or part time jobs, or whether they would be minimum wage jobs. By way of another example,the County indicates the Project will generate sales and property taxes for the County,but also fails to identify how much revenue this will provide in exchange for the significant traffic delays that travelers and users of the I-5/Flag City interchange will suffer. It is unclear from the record how the Planning Commission can adequately and in an informed manner actually weigh the costs and benefits of the Project when they only know a few of the costs and have only vague statements of the benefits. Comments on the Conditional Use Permit The Findings proposed for adoption by the Planning Commission are insufficient to support the approval of the conditional use permit. Specifically,Findings 2, 4 and 5 reference the insufficient Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and/or are conclusory. The EIR does not disclose and mitigate all of the significant impacts of the Project. Accordingly, these findings do not support the CUP. Conclusion In conclusion,we ask that the hearing be continued to January 19,2013 to give our traffic consultant reasonable time to propose adequate alternative feasible solutions to the very real traffic congestion that will result from this Project. In the alternative,we respectfully request that the Planning Commission not certify the Final EIR and deny the conditional use permit as the findings for both are not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Very trruuly,�yours, Katherine J. HartT Attachments cc: J. Mark Myles,Assistant County Counsel Rick Griffin,Planning Director James Moose, Esq.