In plaintiff-environmental society's challenge to defendant-county's approval of a congregate care construction project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and county's General Plan claiming the project would harm two rare plants, judgment in favor of defendant-county is reversed where: 1) the impact fee allowed approval of projects within the relevant environmentally fragile area, but did not eliminate the need to evaluate and address the impacts on plants of a particular project in the area; 2) there was substantial evidence in the record to raise a fair argument that the project may have significant environmental impacts on one or more endangered plant species; and 3) the mitigated negative declaration (MND) should not have been certified and an environmental impact report (EIR) was required for this project.