|
measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects
<br /> thereof."
<br /> The mandate and principles announced in Public Resources Code section 21002 are
<br /> implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies must adopt findings before
<br /> approving projects for which EIRs are required. This mandate to adopt findings is found in
<br /> Public Resources Code section 21081, subdivision (a), and CEQA Guidelines section 15091,
<br /> subdivision (a). Under these provisions, for each significant environmental effect identified in an
<br /> EIR for a Project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of
<br /> three permissible conclusions. The first such finding is that changes or alterations have been
<br /> required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
<br /> environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. The second permissible finding is that such
<br /> changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and
<br /> not the agency making the finding, and that such changes have been adopted by, or can and
<br /> should be adopted by, such other agency. The third potential conclusion is that specific
<br /> economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
<br /> employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or
<br /> project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091.) "[F]easible" means
<br /> capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time,
<br /> taking into account economic, environmental, social, legal, and technological factors." (CEQA
<br /> Guidelines, § 15364.)
<br /> As set forth here, the City Council has adopted the first permissible finding with respect to all
<br /> significant effects identified in the EIR, concluding that all such effects can be mitigated to less
<br /> than significant levels. The City Council therefore has no need to consider the feasibility of any
<br /> project alternatives. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21002; Laurel Hills Homeowners Association v.
<br /> City Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515, 521 (Laurel Hills); see also Kings County Farm Bureau
<br /> v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 730-731; and Laurel Heights Improvement
<br /> Association v. Regents of the University of California (1988)47 Cal.3d 376, 400-403.)
<br /> Under CEQA, where the significant impacts of a project cannot be avoided or substantially
<br /> lessened, either by mitigation measures or a project alternative, a public agency, after adopting
<br /> proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the agency first adopts a "statement of
<br /> overriding considerations" setting forth the specific reasons that the agency found the project's
<br /> benefits outweigh its unavoidable adverse environmental effects. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15093;
<br /> Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, subd. (b).) Here, however, as noted above, the City of
<br /> Pleasanton has identified and adopted feasible mitigation measures that mitigate all significant
<br /> environmental impacts of the Project to less than significant levels. Thus, just as the City is not
<br /> required to address the feasibility of alternatives, the City is also not required to adopt a
<br /> Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Project.
<br /> PROJECT DESCRIPTION
<br /> GHC Lund Ranch LLC is requesting approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
<br /> development plan, which would allow the construction of a total of 50 residential units on the
<br /> 195-acre Lund Ranch II property. On December 1, 2015, the City Council modified the proposed
<br /> project to reduce the number of units to 48 and to require a second access to Sunset Creek
<br /> Lane. 29 units would connect to Sunset Creek Land and 19 would connect to Lund Ranch
<br /> Road. On December 15, 2015, the City Council further modified the proposed project to reduce
<br /> the number of units to 43, to require 12 units to connect to Lund Ranch Road and 31 units to
<br /> LUND RANCH II(PUD-25)RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 2 FINDINGS
<br />
|