SCOPE /FSCR/VCK Joint Comments on Landmark Entitlements 2-21-12 3
subjected to continued deterioration of their water quality as outlined in comments submitted to yourBoard and below.
82.Board finds that there is no evidence that the proposed project will be
materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the project site.
We object to this finding because residents of Santa Clarita will be subjected to increased air qualityimpacts that diminish their ability to recreate and enjoy their property and continued water qualityproblems that will devalue their property, among other reasons cited below. Downstream owners andfarmers will be subjected to additional flooding. No hearings have been held notifying owners of floodway changes. Increased salts from sewage effluent will harm downstream farming
84. The Board finds that the proposed subdivision does not contain or front upon any
public waterway, river, stream, coastline, shoreline, lake, or reservoir, consistent with Chapter 4, Article 3.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, section 66478.1 of the California Government Code, et seq.
The project fronts on the Santa Clara River.
85. The Board finds that in determining that the project will be consistent with the
General Plan, the housing and employment needs of the region were considered and balanced against the public service needs of local residents and the
available fiscal and environmental resources.
86. The Board finds that a Revised Final Project EIR for the project was prepared in accordance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Document Reporting Procedures and Guidelines of the County of Los Angeles.The Board reviewed and considered the Revised Final Project EIR, along with its associated Findings and SOC, and found that it reflects the independent
judgment of the Board. The Findings and SOC are incorporated herein by this
reference, as if set forth in full.
102. The Board finds that CUP Ii authorizes the import of necessary fill material to raise elevation of the Vesting Map site, which requires an adjustment of the County Floodway boundary to account for changes to the floodplain boundary as a result of flood protection improvements for the project. By elevating the project site out of the floodplain boundary, none of the improvements proposed on the Vesting Map site will be subject to flood hazard or inundation from the river or other nearby drainages. In addition, by elevating the Vesting Map site out of the
floodplain boundary and providing bank stabilization where necessary, no housing or other structures will be exposed to flood hazards. The Board further finds that Public Works' conditions of approval for drainage and grading will ensure implementation of CUP II and that the Revised Final Project EIR analyzed the potential impacts of this contemplated action.103. The Board finds that substantial benefits resulting from implementation of the project outweigh its unavoidable significant
on visual quality, air quality,
solid waste services, and agricultural resources.
107. The Board finds that in determining that the project will be consistent with the General Plan, the housing and employment needs of the region were considered and balanced against the public service needs of local residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources.108. The Board finds that a Revised Final Project EIR for the project was prepared in