11 - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton Recycled Water Project CEQA Addendum Table 1 Environmental Review of Proposed Project Changes Environmental Issue Area Where Impact(s) were Analyzed in Prior Environmental Documents. What were the Environmental Impact conclusions for the Original Proposed Project? Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant or Substantially More Severe Impacts? Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts? Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Prior Mitigation Measures Sufficient for Addressing Any New Potential Changes or Impacts? field and thus would not result in any new impacts to agricultural resources as was evaluated in the IS/MND. Further, the Proposed Project change would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use. Also, the construction activities associated with the booster pump station would be substantially the same as they were originally described in the IS/MND. The Revised Proposed Project therefore would not have any incrementally significant effects to agricultural resources as defined in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). Air Quality IS/MND Pages 3-5 through 3-10 LTS/M No ; No No Yes IS/MND Discussion: As described in the IS/MND, construction of the Proposed Project would result in temporary, but not significant and unavoidable, impacts to air quality. However, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's approach to analyses of construction impacts as noted in their BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines is to emphasize implementation of effective and comprehensive control measures rather than detailed quantification of emissions. As a result, the Proposed Project's construction related dust impacts would be reduced further with the implementation of dust effective dust control measures and would remain less than significant. IS/MND Mitigation Measures: • Mitigation Measure AIR -1: Basic Construction Mitigation Measures Recommended for All Projects • Mitigation Measure AIR -2: Additional Construction Mitigation Measures for Projects with Emissions Over the Thresholds Project Change Discussion: The proposed changes to the Proposed Project would have the same impacts to air quality as the Original Proposed Project. The addition of the new booster pump station would not result in any new impacts to air quality as was evaluated in the IS/MND. Operations would be powered by electricity from PG&E and would not result in any new emissions. Also, the construction activities associated with the new booster pump station would be substantially the same as they were originally described in the IS/MND and would not have any significant short-term construction air quality impacts. See Appendix 13 for Air Quality estimated emissions for the construction of the booster pump station. The Revised Proposed Project therefore would not have any incrementally significant air quality effects as defined in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). Biological Resources IS/MND Pages 3-11 through 3-15 LTS/M No No No Yes IS/MND Discussion: As identified in the IS/MND, the Proposed Project/ could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. Specifically, the construction activities of the Proposed Project have the potential to affect these species in various ways ranging from removal and/or disturbance. However, with the implementation of the following mitigation measures any impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. April 2018 3-8