My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-069 - Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2014-01
Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
2011 -
>
2014
>
2014-069 - Final Environmental Impact Report No. 2014-01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/18/2014 10:54:14 AM
Creation date
11/18/2014 10:38:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Resolution
Doc #
2014-069
Date
10/21/2014
Destruction Year
P
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.
/
469
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
8. Impacts Found Not to Be Significant <br />California Public Resources Code Section 21003 (f) states: "...it is the policy of the state that... [a]ll persons <br />and public agencies involved in the environmental review process be responsible for carrying out the process <br />in the most efficient, expeditious manner in order to conserve the available financial, governmental, physical, <br />and social resources with the objective that those resources may be better applied toward the mitigation of <br />actual significant effects on the environment" This policy is reflected in the State California Environmental <br />Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) Section 15126.2(a), which states that "[a]n EIR [Environmental <br />Impact Report] shall identify and focus on the significant environmental impacts of the proposed project" <br />and Section 15143, which states that "[t]he EIR shall focus on the significant effects on the environment" <br />The Guidelines allow use of an Initial Study to document project effects that are less than significant <br />(Guidelines Section 15063[a]). Guidelines Section 15128 requires that an EIR contain a statement briefly <br />indicating the reasons that various possible significant effects of a project were determined not to be <br />significant, and were therefore not discussed in detail in the Draft EIR. <br />8.1 ASSESSMENT IN THE INITIAL STUDY <br />The Initial Study prepared for the proposed project in June 2013 determined that impacts listed below would <br />be less than significant. Consequently, they have not been further analyzed in this Draft EIR. Please refer to <br />Appendix A for explanation of the basis of these conclusions. Impact categories and questions below are <br />summarized directly from the CEQA Environmental Checklist, as contained in the Initial Study. <br />Table 8 -1 Impacts Found Not to Be Significant <br />Environmental Issues Initial Study Determination <br />I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: <br />a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? I No Impact <br />b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rack No Impact <br />II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are <br />significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site <br />Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing <br />impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are <br />significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of <br />Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range <br />Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology <br />Drovided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the Droiect: <br />Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of statewide <br />Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the No Impact <br />Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources <br />b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? I No Impact <br />October 014 Page 8 -1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.