My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
31A - 2100 W ALTON
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2008
>
01/07/2008
>
31A - 2100 W ALTON
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 4:34:56 PM
Creation date
1/1/2008 11:38:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Item #
31A
Date
1/7/2008
Destruction Year
2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
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 />Environmental Cheo~list <br />For CEQA Compliance <br />Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: <br />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 aproject-specific <br />screening analysis). <br />It. All answers must take account of the whole action involved,. including 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 />III. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If <br />there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is <br />required. <br />IV. "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation <br />measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant impact'. <br />The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to <br />• a less than significant level. <br />Issues & Supporting Information Sources <br />I. Aesthetics -Would the project: <br />Potentially <br />Significant <br />Potentially Unless Less Than <br />Significant Mitigation Significant No <br />Impact Incorporated Impact Impact <br />A. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ^ ^ (~ ~ <br />B. Damage scenic resources, including but not limited ^ ^ f~ ^ <br />to, trees, rock outpourings and historic buildings J`~ <br />within a state highway? <br />C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character `/ <br />or quality of the site and its surroundings? ^ ^ p'4 ^ <br />D. Create a new source of substantial light or glare fff "'~~~ <br />which would adversely affect day or nighttime views <br />in the area? ^ ^ <br />^ <br /> <br />md\msword\envcheck.doc\1.'15.99 'J Page 1 of 10 <br />~~~'~~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.