2010-024 - The Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2006-02

Home Browse Search

CHAPTER 2 CEQA Findings 2.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter presents the potential impacts that were identified in the EIR and the findings that are required in accordance with Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. The possible findings fox each sigtificant and/or potenriall}> significant adverse impact axe as follows: (1) Changes or alterations ham>e been required in, or incorporated into, the project which a~*oid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR ("Finding 1 "). (2) Such changes or alterations axe ~vitlvu the responsibilit}- and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the £rnding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agent}' ("Finding 2"). (3) Specific economic, social, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities For highly trained ~voxkers, make infeasible the mitigation treasures or project alternatives in the EIR ("Finding 3"). CEQt1 requires that a Responsible tlgency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to avoid or substantially reduce significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur as a result of a project. A Responsible Agency has responsibilit}' fox n-utigating or a~>oiding only the du-ect or indirect environmental effects of those parts of the project which it decides to carry out, finance or approve (State CEQA Guidelines §15096(8)[1]). Project modification or alternatives are not required, however, where they arc infeasible or where the responsibility Eox tnodifj'ing the project lies Frith some other agency (State CEQA Guidelines §15092(a)[2],[3]). Public Resources Code Section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of tune, taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors." State CEQ11 Guidelines Section 153G4 adds another factor: "legal" considerations. (See also Ct/i~ans of Goleln i~~OJ~ is Iioaszl oJSipeivisora [Goleta II] [1990] 52 Ca1.3d 553, 5G5 [27G Cal. Rptr. 410].) Only after fully complying with the Endings requirement can an agency adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Cltl~anr foi•~unlig' G~owlb u. Ge~j• nJA4osiut Shasta [1988] 198 Cal_App3d 433, 442, 445 [243 Cal. Rptr. 727]). CEQt1 requires [he Responsible Agency to state in writing the specific rationale to support its actions based on the Final EIR and/or information in the record. This written statement is kno«>n as the Statement of O~=erriding Considerations- The Statement of O~-exriding Considerations provides the information that demonstrates the decision making bod}> of the Responsible Agency i>as weighed the benefits of the project against its unavoidable ach=ersc effects in determining whether to approc=e the project If the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse ens>ironmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered "acceptable." The California Supreme Court has stated that, "the wisdom of approving any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local of£rcials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply F~~HiH,,~,1]~r ~~1(h~f~>ose decisions be informed, and therefore balanced" (Gv/e!n ZI, 52 Cal.3d 553, 576 P~~ CaPfR. 401]). Transit Zoning Code (SD 84) EIR Flndings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Conslderatlons 2_1