Item 41 - Amendment Application No. 2022-01 and Appeal Nos. 2022-01 and 2022-02

Home Browse Search

City Response to Melinda Luthin Appeal No. 2022-02 Comment 7: This comment states that the identity of the CUP applicant is unclear and that the applicant does not appear to be qualified to apply for the requested CUP. Response 7: This claim is similar to that made in Comment No. 1. As stated previously, the applicant's information is contained within the application and was described in the staff report, ordinance, and resolution prepared for the project. The information therein is consistent with the information contained within the submitted applications. Comment 8: This comment states that the Planning Commission approved the CUP for a use not permissible in the Professional (P) zoning district. Response 8: Among the requested actions is approval of an amendment application (zone change) to bring the site's zoning designation into conformance with the General Plan. The current zoning designation (P) is inconsistent with the Industrial/Flex. The requested zoning district amendment to Light Industrial (M1) would establish consistency with the General Plan land use designation and would allow the requested project through approval of a CUP. Comment 9: This comment claims that the Planning Commission resolution approving the CUP contains false statements as to the identity of the owner. Response 9: The appellant does not provide any additional information to justify this claim. Comment 10: This comment alleges that the CUP was approved without proper environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Response 10: The City has evaluated the project in full compliance with the provisions of CEQA. After a thorough evaluation and preparation of an initial study checklist, the City prepared an exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21083.3 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, projects that are "consistent with the development density established by the existing zoning, community plan or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site." As detailed in the Environmental Impact section of this report, the project was fully evaluated to determine if there are any project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site, and none were subsequently determined. Therefore, the Section 15183 exemption prepared for the project is the appropriate form of environmental review. The exemption is attached to the report as Exhibit 10 and a complete response to this is contained in Exhibit 13 to this report. Comment 11: This comment states that the Planning Commission approved the CUP for a use of land not permissible in the General Plan. Response 11: Refer to Response No. 8. Exhibit 15 Page 3of5