My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
08
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
012015
>
08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 2:02:27 PM
Creation date
1/14/2015 12:08:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/20/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
8
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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
City of Pleasanton Recycled Water Project <br /> CEQA Addendum <br /> Table 3 <br /> Environmental Review of Proposed Project Changes <br /> Do Proposed <br /> Changes Are Prior <br /> Involve Any New Mitigation <br /> What were the New Circumstances Measures <br /> Where Impact(s) Environmental Significant Involving New Any New Sufficient for <br /> were Analyzed Impact or Significant Information Addressing <br /> in conclusions for Substantially Impacts Requiring Any New <br /> Prior the Original More or Substantially New Potential <br /> Environmental Proposed Severe More Severe Analysis or Changes or <br /> Environmental Issue Area Documents. Project? Impacts? Impacts? Verification? Impacts? <br /> IS/MND <br /> Aesthetics/Visual Page 3-2 LTS No No No Yes <br /> IS/MND Discussion: <br /> As identified in the IS/MND, implementation of the Proposed Project would have no to less than significant <br /> potential impacts to aesthetic and visual resources. As a result, implementation of the Proposed Project as described <br /> in the IS/MND would not result in significant unavoidable impacts to the visual character or add substantial amounts <br /> of light and glare. <br /> IS/MND Mitigation Measures: <br /> • None identified or necessary. <br /> Project Change Discussion: <br /> The proposed changes to the Proposed Project would have the same impacts to aesthetic/visual resources as the <br /> Original Proposed Project.The addition of 720 feet or 0.1 mile of new pipeline would not result in any new aesthetic <br /> or visual impacts that were evaluated in the IS/MND. Also, the construction activities associated with the revised <br /> pipeline conveyance facilities would be substantially the same as they were originally described in the IS/MND as <br /> they would also be constructed within existing roadways, highly disturbed areas, and/or public right-of-ways. The <br /> Revised Proposed Project therefore would not have any incrementally significant aesthetics/visual effects as defined <br /> in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). <br /> Agricultural IS/MND LTS No No No Yes <br /> Resources Page 3-4 <br /> IS/MND Discussion: <br /> As identified in the IS/MND, implementation of the Proposed Project would have no to less than significant <br /> potential impacts to agricultural resources. The Proposed Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique <br /> Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the <br /> Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use. The <br /> Proposed Project would be primarily constructed within existing roadways within the City. In addition,the Proposed <br /> Project will not be located on any existing agricultural fields or farmlands. As a result, the Proposed Project would <br /> not convert any farmland to non-agricultural usage. No mitigation is required or necessary. <br /> IS/MND Mitigation Measures: <br /> • None identified or necessary. <br /> Project Change Discussion: <br /> The proposed changes to the Proposed Project would have the same impacts to agricultural resources as the Original <br /> Proposed Project. The addition of 720 feet or 0.1 mile of new pipeline would not result in any new impacts to <br /> agricultural resources as was evaluated in the IS/MND. Also, the construction activities associated with the revised <br /> pipeline conveyance facilities would be substantially the same as they were originally described in the IS/MND as <br /> they would also be constructed within existing roadways, highly disturbed areas, and/or public right-of-ways. The <br /> December 2014 3-3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.