My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
75E - PH 2525 MAIN ST
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2019
>
02/05/2019
>
75E - PH 2525 MAIN ST
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/1/2019 4:04:49 PM
Creation date
2/1/2019 3:58:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Planning & Building
Item #
75E
Date
2/5/2019
Destruction Year
2024
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
378
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
EXHIBIT A <br />redevelopment within the City, such as the Project, shall be undertaken in accordance with the County <br />Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). The DAMP requires construction sites to implement control <br />practices that address erosion and sedimentation (DAMP Section 8.0). Additionally, the Statewide <br />National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for General Construction Activity <br />requires implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), by a Qualified SWPPP <br />Developer. The SWPPP is required to be consistent with the County DAMP, address site-specific <br />conditions related to sources of sediment, and implement erosion control and sediment control Best <br />Management Practices to reduce or eliminate sediment during construction. The Project is required to <br />adhere to a City approved SWPPP, which would be verified prior to the issuance of a demolition or grading <br />permit; this will ensure that potential erosion associated with construction activities would constitute a <br />less than significant impact. (Initial Study, pp. 31-32.) <br />9.6.3 Soil Stability <br />Threshold: Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would <br />become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral <br />spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? <br />Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, p. 2-6; Initial Study, p. 32.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site does not contain unstable soils or unstable geologic units. <br />As discussed above, the Project site is located in a flat, developed urban area that does not contain, and is <br />not adjacent to, large slopes; moreover, the Project would not generate large slopes. Accordingly, impacts <br />related to landslides would not occur as a result of the Project. Also, as discussed above, the depth to <br />groundwater and the types of soils onsite result in a low potential for liquefaction and related lateral <br />spreading or ground failure. In addition, as further discussed above, the Project would be required to have <br />building foundations and pavement areas and must be constructed in compliance with the CBC and the <br />City's Municipal Code, which requires appropriate back fill, compaction of soils, and foundation design <br />to ensure stable soils. For the aforementioned reasons, the Project would result in a less than significant <br />impact related to unstable soil or geologic units. <br />In addition, the Project is not located on a geological unit or soil that would become unstable as a result <br />of subsidence. Subsidence is a general lowering of the ground surface over a large area that is generally <br />attributed to lowering of the groundwater levels within a groundwater basin. Subsidence or settlement of <br />the ground can occur as a result of earthquake motion in an area where groundwater in a basin is lowered. <br />Because the Project does not involve groundwater pumping, impacts related to subsidence will not occur <br />as a result of the Project. (Initial Study, p. 32.) <br />9.6.4 Soil Expansion <br />Threshold: Would the Project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the <br />Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? <br />Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, p. 2-6; Initial Study, pp. 32-33.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The Project would not be located on expansive soil. Expansive soils contain <br />certain types of clay minerals that shrink or swell as the moisture content changes. As described above, <br />the Project site soils consist of silty fine to medium sands with local layers of fine to coarse sands with <br />gravel size rock and some larger rock fragments, which have a low expansion potential. (Initial Study, p. <br />Resolution No. <br />Certification of the Magnolia at the Park EIR <br />75E-67 <br />Page 29 of 71 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.