My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FULL PACKET_2006-03-06
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2006
>
03/06/2006
>
FULL PACKET_2006-03-06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2016 4:44:52 PM
Creation date
3/1/2006 11:46:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
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.
/
252
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
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: <br />A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are <br />adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses <br />following each question. A "No Impact' answer is adequately supported if the referenced <br />information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one <br />involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact' answer <br />should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general <br />standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a <br />project -specific screening analysis). <br />II. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as <br />on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as <br />well as operational impacts. <br />III. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect <br />is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact' entries when the <br />determination is made, an EIR is required. <br />IV. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of <br />mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact' to a "Less <br />than Significant Impact". The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and <br />briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. <br />db\Env Form CEQA Chklst 3' 53 Page 1 of 9 <br />Potentially <br />Significant <br />Potentially <br />Unless <br />Less Than <br />Significant <br />Mitigation <br />Significant <br />No <br />Issues & Supporting Information Sources <br />Impact <br />Incorporated <br />Impact <br />Impact <br />I. Aesthetics — Would the project: <br />A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />to, trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings <br />within a state highway? <br />C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character <br />or quality of the site and its surroundings? <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare <br />which would adversely affect day or nighttime views <br />in the area? <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />db\Env Form CEQA Chklst 3' 53 Page 1 of 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.