08 - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton Recycled Water Project CEQA Addendum Table 3 Environmental Review of Proposed Project Changes Do Proposed Changes Are Prior Involve Any New Mitigation What were the New Circumstances Measures Where Impact(s) Environmental Significant Involving New Any New Sufficient for were Analyzed Impact or Significant Information Addressing in conclusions for Substantially Impacts Requiring Any New Prior the Original More or Substantially New Potential Environmental Proposed Severe More Severe Analysis or Changes or Environmental Issue Area Documents. Project? Impacts? Impacts? Verification? Impacts? IS/MND Mitigation Measures: • None identified or necessary Project Change Discussion: The proposed changes to the Proposed would have the same or less impact on public services as the Original Proposed Project. The addition of 720 feet or 0.1 mile of new pipeline would not result in any new impacts as was evaluated in the IS/MND. Also, the construction activities associated with the revised pipeline conveyance facilities would be substantially the same as they were originally described in the IS/MND as they would also be constructed within existing roadways, highly disturbed areas, and/or public right-of-ways. The Revised Proposed Project therefore would not have any incrementally significant effects on public services as defined in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). Recreation IS/MND NI No No No Yes Page 3-36 IS/MND Discussion: The Proposed Project would not contribute to population growth. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. As a result, no impact is expected and no mitigation is required. IS/MND Mitigation Measures: • None identified or necessary. Project Change Discussion: The proposed changes to the Proposed would have the same or less impact on recreation as the Original Proposed Project. The addition of 720 feet or 0.1 mile of new pipeline would not result in any new impacts as was evaluated in the IS/MND. Also, the construction activities associated with the revised pipeline conveyance facilities would be substantially the same as they were originally described in the IS/MND as they would also be constructed within existing roadways, highly disturbed areas, and/or public right-of-ways. The Revised Proposed Project therefore would not have any incrementally significant effects on recreation as defined in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). IS/MND Socioeconomics Pages 3-37 LTS No No No Yes and 3-38 IS/MND Discussion: While, not a specific CEQA resource category, the IS/MND conducted an evaluation on the Proposed Project's potential to have socioeconomic impacts in order to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). As such, the IS/MND concluded that the Proposed Project would not have any socioeconomic impacts. The Proposed Project does not propose any features that would result in disproportionate adverse human health or environmental effects, have any physical effects on minority or low-income populations,and/or alter socioeconomic conditions of populations that reside or work within the City and vicinity. December 2014 3-10