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? Geology and Soils IS/MND Pages 3-19 and 3-20 LTS/M No No No Yes IS/MND Discussion: As described in the IS/MND, the Proposed Project may be located in areas that consist of medium dense to dense fine granular soils. In addition, perched groundwater could be present. As such, the soil in some areas of the alignment may have a high susceptibility to liquefaction during seismic shaking. Other portions of the Project may be less susceptible to liquefaction and related damage. Lateral spreading, often associated with liquefaction, is less likely because there are no steep banks or hard ground bordering the Project area, but could still potentially be a hazard. However, with the implementation of the following mitigation measure, any impacts are reduced to less than significant levels. As a result, the following mitigation is proposed: IS/MND Mitigation Measure: • Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Perform Geotechnical Investigation Project Change Discussion: The proposed changes to the Proposed Project would have the same impacts to geology and soils as the Original Proposed Project. The addition of the new booster pump station would not result in any new impacts to geology and soils as was evaluated in the IS/MND. 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. The Revised Proposed Project therefore would not have any incrementally significant effects on geology and soils as defined in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). Hazards and Hazardous Materials IS/MND Pages 3-21 through 3-23 LTS✓M No No No - Yes IS/MND Discussion: With the implementation of mitigation, the Proposed Project would not result in any residual significant and unavoidable impacts related to risks of upset or accidental release of hazards and hazardous materials. Therefore, project implementation would not result in any residual significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. IS/MND Mitigation Measures: • Mitigation Measure HAZ-l: Store, Handle, Use Hazardous Materials in Accordance with Applicable Laws • Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Properly Dispose of Contaminated Soil and/or Groundwater • Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: Properly Dispose of Hydrostatic Test Water • Mitigation Measure HAZ-4: Develop and Maintain Emergency Access Strategies Project Change Discussion: The proposed changes to the Proposed Project would have the same chances to cause a significant hazard to the public and/or the environment as the Original Proposed Project. The construction and operation of the new booster pump station would not result in any new hazards or hazardous waste impacts as was evaluated in the IS/MND. The April 2018 3-10