3 - The Bowery_PUBLIC COMMENT_RAMSEY

Home Browse Search

1.0 Introduction Avion Project SEIR Page 1-5 These issues are discussed in detail in Chapter 5.0 of this SEIR. This SEIR provides project-specific environmental review pursuant to CEQA. The analysis identifies environmental effects specific to the project and appropriate mitigation, when warranted. Chapter 9.0 of this SEIR, “No Changes in Analysis,” contains a summary of the impacts of the project compared with the impacts analyzed in the 1998 EIR. The analysis in this document evaluates the adequacy of the 1998 EIR relative to approval of the project. The 1998 EIR indicates that significant impacts for the project site would be substantially lessened or avoided if the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR are implemented by future development for various environmental issues, as identified below in Table 1-1. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were not addressed in the 1998 EIR. The issue of GHG is not addressed in this SEIR as the courts have established that climate change and GHG do not constitute “new information” because the effects of GHG on climate change were known when the EIR was certified in 1998 and therefore do not have to be addressed as “new information” in a SEIR (Citizens Against Airport Pollution v. City of San Jose (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 788, 806-808). A comparison of the project to the 1998 EIR is provided below in Table 1-1. The project would implement applicable mitigation measures included in the 1998 EIR and/or this SEIR, as indicated in the table. Table 1-1 Impact Assessment Summary 1998 EIR Issue Area FEIR/Subarea Plan Analysis Conclusion1 New or Substantially Increased Impact? New and/or Previous Mitigation)? Resultant Project Impact after Mitigation? A. Land Use Plan Consistency Less than significant No No Less than significant LDC Deviations Potentially2 significant No No Less than significant MSCP consistency (MHPA Adjacency) Potentially significant Yes New Less than significant B. Traffic Significant unmitigated No Previous Significant unmitigated C. Biological Resources Significant unmitigated No New Less than significant D. Hydrology/Water Quality Significant mitigated No No Less than significant E. Landform Alteration/Visual Quality Landform Alteration Potentially significant Yes New Significant unmitigated Visual Character Significant mitigated No No Less than significant Unique geologic feature Less than significant No No Less than significant Landmark Trees Less than significant No No Less than significant F. Cultural Resources Less than significant No No Less than significant G. Air Quality Direct Impacts (Traffic) Significant unmitigated No No Significant unmitigated Cumulative Impacts (Construction) Significant unmitigated Yes Previous Less than significant H. Geology and Soils Potentially significant No No Less than significant I. Natural Resources/ Agriculture Significant and unmitigated No No Significant and unmitigated J. Paleontological Resources Less than significant No No Less than Significant K. Noise Traffic Less than significant No No Less than significant Construction Potentially significant Yes New Less than significant L. Public Facilities and Services Schools Significant and mitigated No No Less than significant Parks and Recreation Less than significant No No Less than significant Libraries Less than significant No No Less than significant Police and Fire Services Police: Less than significant Fire: Potentially significant No No Less than significant Water Supply and Service Significant and mitigated No No Less than significant