2009-025 - Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2004-02

Home Browse Search

Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on aproject-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is a "New Significant Impact," a "More Severe Impact," or "No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis." "More Severe Impacts" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If one or more entries are "New Significant Impacts" or "More Severe Impacts" when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "New Significant Impacts" or "More Severe Impacts" to "No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis". The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis," describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance Resolution No. 2009-025 Rt~~furff9lace South EIR Addendum 59