SU0008325 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

T -3- APPEAL STATEMENTS Appeal Statement No. 1 The Planning Commission erred in certifying the Environmental Impact Report(PA- 1200065) and in approving the conditional use permit(PA-1000131)(the Project). As stated by Appellant's counsel's letters dated November 13, 2012 and December 20, 2012, the Project's traffic and air quality impacts still have not been properly assessed pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.Additionally,the County's statement of overriding considerations is not supported by substantial evidence. As a result,the Planning Commission lacked sufficient and substantial evidence to support required Findings 2,4, and 5. Response To Appeal Statement No. 1 Notwithstanding claims to the contrary to Pilot's attorney,the environmental impacts of this project were properly assessed. The reasons why the County stands by its analyses are set forth in the Final EIR in responses to Pilot's comments on the Draft EIR. Nothing in the correspondence received from Pilot on December 20,2012, or in the appeal documents themselves has persuaded County staff or its consultants that the original analyses were flaws in any respects. Mitigation includes 5.06 acres of agricultural mitigation;habitat mitigation through the Council of Governments; and traffic mitigation through the Department of Public Works. There are two impacts that,despite the imposition of feasible mitigation, could not be mitigated below a level of significance,therefore a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted by the Planning Commission and must be approved again by the Board of Supervisors if it chooses to approve the Project itself. Projects in the C-FS zone may be conditionally permitted with an approved Use Permit. Each of the Commissioners was able to make all of the Findings,including Findings 2, 4, and 5, listed below. Finding 2 can be made because adequate utilities, access roads, sanitation, drainage and other necessary facilities will be provided and the proposed improvements are properly related to existing and proposed streets and highways. Public sewer,public water, and terminal storm drainage will be provided by CSA 31. Finding 4 can be made because all but specific traffic impacts can be mitigated to less-than-significant levels with the recommended Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Plan. The two traffic impacts are overridden by the benefits detailed in the attached"Statement of Overriding Consideration".