RES 12492 - Laserfiche WebLink

The Project would not create new sources of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the Planning Area. (Draft SEIR, pp. 4.A-19 to 4.A-21; Impact 4.A-4.) The Project would not have a cumulatively considerable adverse impact to aesthetic resources. (Draft SEIR, p. 4.A-21; Impact 4.A-5.) 2. Air Quality The Project would not conflict, directly or cumulatively, with the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan because the projected rate of increase in vehicle miles traveled ("VMT") is not greater than the projected rate of increase in population and because implementation of policies included in the Circulation Element of the Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025 would implement transportation control measures consistent with the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan. (Draft SEIR, pp. 4.B-17 to 4.B-26; Impacts 4.B-2 , 4.B-3 and 4.B-6.) 3. Biological Resources The Project would not cause adverse impacts to trees or conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. (Draft SEIR, pp. 4.0-35 to 4.0-36; Impact 4.0-4.) The Project would not conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. (Draft SEIR, p. 4.0-37; Impact 4.0-5.) The Project would not have a cumulatively considerable adverse impact on biological resources. (Draft SEIR, p. 4.0-38 to 4.0-39; Impact 4.0-6.) 4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions The Project would not adversely affect greenhouse gas emissions or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. (Draft SEIR, pp. 4.E-13 to 4.E-19; Impacts 4.E-1 and 4.E-2.) 5. Geological Resources The Project would not result in any direct or cumulatively considerable significant adverse affects to geological resources. (Draft SEIR, pp. 4.F-17 to 4.F-23; Impacts 4.F-1 through 4.F-6.) 6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. (Draft SEIR, pp. 4.G-9 to 4.G-11; Impact 4.G-1.) The Project would not create a significant adverse affect related to hazardous material releases within the vicinity of an existing or proposed school. (Draft SEIR, pp. 4.G-13 to 4.G-14; Impact 4.G-3.) The Project has no potential to result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the vicinity of a private airstrip as no such private airstrips exist in the vicinity of the City. (Draft SEIR, p. 4.G-17; Impact 4.G-6.)