My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
32A - TTM 2005-11, 2000 E FIRST
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2006
>
05/01/2006
>
32A - TTM 2005-11, 2000 E FIRST
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 4:46:57 PM
Creation date
4/26/2006 11:54:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Item #
32A
Date
5/1/2006
Destruction Year
2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
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
<br />rnY~~ANTA <br />ANA <br /> <br />Environmental Checklist <br />For CEQA Compliance <br /> <br />Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: <br /> <br />I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported <br />by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" <br />answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does <br />not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No <br />Impact" answer 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 project-specific <br />screening analysis). <br /> <br />II. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, inciuding off-site as well as on-site, <br />cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational <br />impacts. <br /> <br />III. "Potentially Significant Impacr' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If <br />there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impacr' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is <br />required. <br /> <br />IV. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation <br />measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impacr' to a "Less than Significant Impacr'. <br />The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefiyexplain how they reduce the effect to <br />a less than significant level. <br /> <br /> Potentially <br /> Significant <br /> Potentially Unless Less Than <br /> Significant Mitigation Significant No <br />Issues & Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact <br />I. Aesthetics - Would the project: <br /> A. Have a substantiai adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 M <br /> B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited 0 0 0 )E{ <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? 0 0 0 <br /> D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare <br /> which would adversely affect day or nighttime views M <br /> in the area? 0 0 0 <br /> <br />db\Env Form CEQA Chklst <br /> <br />ATTACHMENT B <br />32A~55 <br /> <br />Page 1 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.