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? The proposed changes to the Proposed would have the same impacts to land use and land use planning as the Original Proposed Project. The addition the new booster pump station would not result in any new significant impacts to land use as was evaluated in the IS/MND. The new booster pump station would be located in a sports park, but would be located away from the fields and would not change any land use at the park. 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 land use and land use planning effects as defined in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). Mineral Resources IS/MND Page 3-31 NI No No No Yes IS/MND Discussion: The Proposed Project is not located in an area identified as containing mineral resources classified MRZ-2 by the State geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. As a result, the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources; therefore, no impact is expected. 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 impacts to mineral resources as the Original Proposed Project. The addition of the new booster pump station would not located in an area identified as containing mineral resources classified MRZ-2 by the State geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. And thus would not result in any new impacts to mineral resources 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 mineral resource effects as defined in CEQA Guideline section 15162(a). Noise IS/MND Pages 3-31 through 3-33 LTS/M No No No Yes IS/MND Discussion: The Proposed Project has the potential to generate noise during the construction phase through the use of equipment and construction vehicle trips. Once constructed, the Proposed Project would not create any new sources of operational noise. Therefore, operation of the pipeline would not result in permanent noise impacts. Construction of the Proposed Project would generate temporary and intermittent noise. Noise levels would fluctuate depending on the particular type, number, and duration of use of various pieces of construction equipment. Back-up beepers associated with trucks and equipment used for material loading and unloading at the staging area would generate significantly increased noise levels over the ambient noise environment in order to be discernable and protect construction worker safety as required by OSHA (29 CFR 1926.601 and 29 CFR 1926.602). Businesses and residences in the vicinity of the project area could thus be exposed to these elevated noise levels. Construction activities associated with the project would be temporary in nature and related noise impacts would be April 2018 3-12