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? Revised Proposed Project therefore would not have any incrementally significant effects on the potential to cause a significant hazard to the public and/or the environment as defined in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). Hydrology and Water Quality IS/MND Pages 3-24 through 3-28 LTS/M No No No Yes IS/MND Discussion: With implementation of the mitigation measures listed in the IS/MND, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in any residual significant impacts related to increased risk of flooding from stormwater runoff, from water quality effects from long-term urban runoff, or from short-term alteration of drainages and associated surface water quality and sedimentation. Based on these circumstances, the Proposed Project would not result in any residual significant and unavoidable adverse impacts to surface water hydrology and water quality. IS/MND Mitigation Measures: • Mitigation Measure HWQ-1: Implement Construction Best Management Practices • Mitigation Measure HWQ-2: Avoid Cutting Through Creeks • Mitigation Measure HWQ-3: Implement Best Management Practices • Mitigation Measure HWQ-4: Implement Recycled Water Best Management Practices Project Change Discussion: The proposed changes to the Proposed would have the same impacts to hydrology and water quality than the Original Proposed Project. The addition of a new booster pump station would not result in any new impacts to hydrology and/or water quality than 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. Any impacts would be reduced to less -than -significant levels by implementing mitigation measures HWQ-1 through HWQ-4. The Revised Proposed Project therefore would not have any incrementally significant hydrology and water quality effects as defined in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). Land Use and Planning IS/iVIND Page 3-29 NI No No No Yes IS/MND Discussion: The IS/MND concluded that the Proposed Project would not have any adverse or significant effects on land use or land use planning. Specifically, the Proposed Project would not result in a disruption, physical division, or isolation of existing residential or open space areas. The Proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project area. The Proposed Project would also not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. As a result, no mitigation is necessary. IS/MND Mitigation Measures: • None identified or necessary. Project Change Discussion: April 2018 3-11