Laserfiche WebLink
procedure established in PUC sections 21676 and 21676.5. Before the <br /> decision to overrule the ALUC's Determination of Inconsistency may take <br /> place, the City Council must adopt a resolution that authorizes initiation of the <br /> two-step overrule process. <br /> D. At least 45 days prior to any decision to overrule ALUC, the governing body <br /> shall provide ALUC and the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) <br /> Division of Aeronautics a copy of the proposed decision to overrule along with <br /> supportive findings. ALUC may provide comments to the City Council within <br /> 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings. If ALUC's comments <br /> are not available within this time limit, the City Council may act without them. <br /> Should comments be received, the City Council must include the comments <br /> from ALUC in the public record of any final decision to overrule ALUC. This <br /> decision shall be determined at a public hearing to make the specific findings <br /> that the proposed overruling is consistent with the purposes stated in PUC <br /> Section 21670. <br /> E. Staff is hereby directed to conduct further studies as necessary in order to <br /> draft and provide notice of the findings in support of the overrule. The 45-day <br /> period will begin after staff has forwarded the intent to overrule along with the <br /> supportive findings. <br /> F. The Council's adoption of this Resolution is procedural and does not constitute <br /> the proposed Project's approval nor does it predispose the City's future action <br /> on the Project or any decision to overrule. <br /> G. Should the Council adopt this Resolution directing staff to conduct further <br /> studies as necessary in order to make the findings in support of the overrule, <br /> a public hearing will be required for Council consideration of the final <br /> supplemental environmental impact report, and any associated entitlement <br /> applications, for the Project. <br /> Section 2. The City Council finds that the requested action is not subject to <br /> the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) <br /> (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical <br /> change in the environment) and Section 15061(b)(3) (the activity is not a project as <br /> defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential for <br /> resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Specifically, the <br /> resolution does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change <br /> in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the <br /> environment because it is limited to the City's proposal to overrule the ALUC's <br /> determination and does not commit the City to approve the Project. Concurrent with <br /> the review of the proposed Specific Plan, supplemental Environmental Impact <br /> Report No. 2025-01 (State Clearinghouse No. 2020029087) has been prepared for <br /> the proposed Specific Plan as a whole and will be presented to the City Council for <br /> consideration, along with the requested zoning ordinance amendment and <br /> amendment application, at a future hearing date. <br /> Resolution No. 2025-033 <br /> Page 2 of 4 <br />