The California Department of Fish and Wildlife released the Draft Additional Environmental Analysis for the Newhall Ranch Resource Management and Development Plan and Spineflower Conservation Plan Final Environmental Impact Report on Thursday.
The additional analysis is in response to revisions made after the California Supreme Court approved all but two elements of the EIR in November 2015. The release of the additional analysis opens a 60-day public comment period.
The development plan has been revised to respond to the two issues raised by the Supreme Court. The additional environmental analysis released today examines whether the revised project design and construction of proposed bridges would result in harm or other significant adverse effects to the unarmored three spine stickleback, a native fish protected under state and federal law.
The additional environmental analysis also examines whether the revised project would result in significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emission impacts. The revised project is designed to achieve net zero GHG emissions with the implementation of mitigation measures intended to reduce, mitigate and offset 100 percent of GHG emissions.
The California Air Resources Board reviewed the revised project and concluded that there is an adequate basis to determine it does not result in any net additional GHG emissions.
The additional environmental analysis is available at www.wildlife.ca.gov/regions/5/newhall. Written comments will be accepted by CDFW through Friday, Jan. 6, 2017 (including additional days to account for the holidays). Written comments sent by regular mail should be sent to:
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Comments on Newhall Ranch Draft AEA
c/o Betty Courtney
3883 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123
Written comments sent by email should be sent to newhallranch@wildlife.ca.gov. Please put “Comments on Newhall Ranch Draft AEA” in the subject line.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Tweet This
Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
RSS
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
3 Comments
I have no idea what any of that means
This basically means that the two environmental issues that have held up this mega-project are now addressed and the Environmental Impact Report will not hold up the project unless public comments – which will be received up until January 6 – somehow create another study. The two environmental issues that have been successfully addressed are greenhouse gas and a small, endangered fish. Having followed this project, I am much more concerned about 1) its horrible traffic pattern and the little that has been done about it, and 2) the enormous amount of water that this city-by-itself will take. I really don’t know the politics that lead to this project’s approval but one has to wonder. Everyone I’ve heard from regarding this project is very upset by it, especially with the enormous amount of traffic it will add to Fwy 5. “Awesome Town”???
Are they even addressing the dump across the 126 and the large trucks going in and out if there? And how about the directional flow of water off those dump hillsides directly into and the area they want to develop?