San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury
• 2008-2009
The Planning Process Improving Review and Hearing Procedures
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 8 findings
F1
San Luis Obispo County is the only California county with an Environmental Division that is separately staffed for and dedicated solely to the review and analysis of environmental planning issues.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
Both state and county CEQA Guidelines specifically require the Environmental Division to consider both the individual and cumulative environmental effects of projects.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Within a one year period, the Environmental Division of the Planning Department received three applications for Conditional Use Permits to conduct sand and gravel mining operations in the Salinas River or its tributaries and it concurrently reviewed and studied all of these applications from September 2006 through March 2008.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
While concurrently reviewing and studying these three applications over a period of approximately eighteen months, the Environmental Division staff never raised or asked the applicants for studies to address the possible cumulative environmental effects of these applications. _____________________________________________________________________________ 8
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Planning Department and its Environmental Division should institute procedures and training to assure that its environmental resource specialists consider the issue of cumulative environmental effects and advise applicants of this issue at the earliest appropriate time when reviewing applications for projects that may have significant environmental impacts.
F5
Public hearings on the Conditional Use Permit applications for these three applications were scheduled so close to, and even before, the end of the applicable public comment periods that Environmental Division staff requests for continuances were almost a certainty and were, in fact, requested for two of the applications.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Planning Department and its Environmental Planning Division should institute procedures to assure that public hearings on applications involving possible environmental impacts are scheduled not less than 30 days before the end of any applicable public comment period or period for filing Requests for Review.
F6
Continuances of the Planning Commission public hearings for the two applications referenced in Finding 5 resulted in a four to six month delay of a process that had already taken approximately two years before the public hearings were scheduled.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The Planning Department and the Planning Commission permit the submission of written comments by applicants and the public at any time before or during the public hearing process up to the point in time that the Planning Commission makes a decision on a project.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The Planning Commission Rules of Procedure should be revised to establish a deadline for the filing of written comments on applications that is not less than three days before the _____________________________________________________________________________ 9 scheduled public hearing and to provide that any written comments filed after the deadline will not be considered by the Planning Commission and will not be part of the record of the public hearing.
F8
The Planning Commission Rules of Procedure have no provision concerning public comment on revised findings being considered by the Planning Commission after it has closed a public hearing and reached a tentative decision on a matter and there is no legal requirement that public comment be allowed on such revised findings.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The Planning Commission Rules of Procedure should be revised to specifically provide that public comment will not be allowed on revised findings that have been presented to and are being considered by the Planning Commission after the public hearing on the application has been closed and the Planning Commission has made a tentative decision on the project.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
San Luis Obispo County
County