It took more than three hours, but the Amador County Planning Commission finally certified the final environmental impact report on the Mokelumne Bluffs subdivision near Pine Grove on a 4-1 vote Tuesday night.

Before the commissioners voted, they heard from half a dozen county residents, some of whom asked that the final EIR be recirculated because it had changed sufficiently from the draft EIR and deserved additional public comment. Thrown into the mix were lengthy discussions of whether or not global warming is human-caused and a 20-page letter from Attorney General Jerry Brown encouraging California cities and counties to take global warming into account in their planning for new growth. That discussion grew so tedious that at least one speaker prefaced his remarks by noting that he did not intend to "invoke the name of Jerry Brown" in his comments.

Krista Clem, project manager for the 98-home development, which is to be built on nearly 138 acres three miles east of Pine Grove, said global warming was not an issue because the new homes are to be built in an area that is already relatively densely developed and the project "places a high priority on mitigating impacts." No recirculation of the EIR was necessary, Clem said, "if the changes improve the project."

And, she argued, "The vast majority of people who previously opposed this project are now supporting it, as evidenced by their silence."

But Wendell Peart of Pine Grove insisted that development of the currently rural land "will add noxious gases" from tailpipe emissions and thus would add to global warming. Assuming one car per house, Peart said, means that 98 more cars will be traveling to the city of Jackson, and beyond, to Stockton or Sacramento. If the subdivision were instead located in the city of Jackson, he said, it would reduce the amount of motor fuel used.

Vince DeStigter, president of Amador Citizens for Responsible Government, however, called Brown and others "alarmists who attack private property rights," and insisted that global warming is increasingly being called into question by "hundreds of scientists."

Chris Wright, executive director of the Foothill Conservancy, argued that the EIR contained no analysis of the contribution the development would make to greenhouse gases, and said the reason fewer people were present at this month's hearing than last was really "a silent majority - they are so sure you are not going to approve this project that they are not here tonight."

Wright called for recirculating the EIR and insisted that alternatives to the proposed project should be more fully explored, including an alternative with half the number of houses.

In response to a question from a planning commissioner, Charlie Simpson of InSite Environmental in Stockton, whose firm wrote the EIR, agreed that a project with 50 homes instead of 100 would obviously come with "substantially fewer impacts. Less development equals less environmental impacts."

But, Simpson said, "We are not saying the project is the best thing for the environment. We are saying the vast majority of impacts we identified would be mitigated to a less than significant level."

While the subdivision is not being built in an urban area, he said, "except for the vertical wall of the Mokelumne River canyon, everything in the area is developed with one-acre and smaller development."

Jill North of Jackson told the commissioners that many holes had been dug on the property of late, to determine whether septic tanks on each lot would "perk," and "some of them don't perk."

Jeff Moreland of California State Engineering, the company hired to explore the septic tank question for the project, responded that of the 98 lots, only two appear to not have proper soil depth for a septic tank. Those lots, he said, might have to be remerged with other lots.

Andy Byrne, chairman of the planning commission, asked a number of detailed questions about the EIR and ended up casting the lone dissenting vote against certification of the document. Among other issues, he said he was troubled by the fact that the developer plans to just give buyers a booklet outlining ways to preserve the native plants and animals. Byrne also complained that the EIR itself did not contain information on amenities like public restrooms for the recreational areas.

But county Planning Director Susan Grijalva said such matters could be taken care of in the conditions of approval of the project itself, even if they were not in the environmental document. The California Environmental Quality Act does not require "technical perfection" in an EIR, Grijalva said, but "adequacy, completeness and a good-faith effort at full disclosure."

Finally, on a motion by Commissioner Ray Ryan that was seconded by Commissioner John Gonsalves, the commission voted in favor of certifying the EIR. The development will come back to the planning commission on June 10 for further action.

The Mokelumne Bluffs project was first submitted in 2003 under the name "Sutter Creek Villages," and originally called for 123 single-family homes as well as some multi-family. The name was changed because it is nowhere near the city of Sutter Creek.