CORRESPONDENCE_2017-2018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors April 10,2017 Page 7 The MND also attempts to mitigate the potentially significant impacts to nearby residents resulting from fire. The proposed mitigation measure or recommended conditional of approval requires the submission of a Fire Safety Plan with updated procedures for monitoring,controlling,and extinguishing spot fires. There is also a recommended conditional of approval that the Project is subject to field inspections. The Initial Study,however,contains no performance standards associated with the Fire Safety Plan in terms of the reduction of fires or what steps will be taken,when they will be taken and what constitutes a significant reduction in the fire risk. V. THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ADDITION OF MITIGATION MEASURES VIOLATES CEQA After the MND/IS had been released for public review and comment,the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Project. In approving the Project,the Planning Commission adopted several additional mitigation measures. Inclusion of mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less than significant after the release of the IS/MND violates CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code,§ 21064.5,21080(c)(2).) According to CEQA,a"Mitigated Negative Declaration'means a negative declaration prepared for a project when the initial study has identified potentially significant effects on the environment,but(1)revisions in the project plans or proposals made by,or agreed to by,the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant impacts on the environment would occur,and(2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project,as revised,may have a significant effect on the environment. (Pub. Resources Code,§ 21064.5,21080(c); CEQA Guidelines,§§15006(h), 15064(f)(2), 15070(b), 15369.5.) Under Public Resources Code section 21064.5,a project modification permitting the use of mitigated negative declaration must be made before the agency has issued a proposed negative declaration for public review. (See also CEQA Guidelines,§15073). The statutory definition of"mitigated negative declaration' supports the notion that the public must have an opportunity to review a negative declaration that describes the proposed project as modified,rather than as originally proposed,so that comments can be made on the project in its changed form with the proposed mitigation measures. (Pub.Resources Code,§ 21080(c)(2),and CEQA Guidelines section 15070(b)(1);Perley v. County of Calaveras(1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 424,431,fn.3; Plaggmier v. City of San Jose (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 842,853-854; Quail Botanical Gardens Foundation,Inc.v. City of Encinitas(1994)29 Cal.App.4`' 1597, 1604,fn.5.) The County has failed to comply with sections 21064.5 and 21080(c)(2) by not submitting the"post-approval" mitigation measures to the public for review prior to adopting the MND.