My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
14 ATTACHMENT 6 - Appendix A - E
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2022
>
021522
>
14 ATTACHMENT 6 - Appendix A - E
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/10/2022 11:41:35 AM
Creation date
2/10/2022 11:33:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
2/15/2022
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
14
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2022\021522
14 ATTACHMENT 1-5
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2022\021522
14 ATTACHMENT 6 - Appendix F - I
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2022\021522
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
358
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City of Pleasanton–Spotorno Ranch Reduced Development Project <br />Environmental Checklist Initial Study/Consistency Checklist <br /> <br /> <br />48 FirstCarbon Solutions <br />https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480021/Consistency Checklist/21480021 Spotorno Ranch Consistency Checklist ScreenCheck.docx <br />Environmental Issues <br />Prior 1998 <br />HVSP FEIR <br />Determination <br />CEQA Section 15183(b) Criteria <br />Effect <br />Peculiar to <br />Project or <br />Site? <br />New <br />Significant <br />Effect? <br />New <br />Significant <br />Off-site, <br />Cumulative <br />Impact? <br />New <br />Information, <br />More Severe <br />Adverse <br />Impact? <br />4.1 Aesthetics <br />Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: <br />a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a <br />scenic vista? <br />Less than <br />significant <br />impact with <br />mitigation <br />incorporated <br />No No No No <br />b) Substantially damage scenic resources, <br />including, but not limited to, trees, rock <br />outcroppings, and historic building within <br />a state scenic highway? <br />Less than <br />significant <br />impact with <br />mitigation <br />incorporated <br />No No No No <br />c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially <br />degrade the existing visual character or <br />quality of public views of the site and its <br />surroundings? (Public views are those <br />that are experienced from publicly <br />accessible vantage point). If the project is <br />in an urbanized area, would the project <br />conflict with applicable zoning and other <br />regulations governing scenic quality? <br />Less than <br />significant <br />impact with <br />mitigation <br />incorporated <br />No No No No <br />d) Create a new source of substantial light <br />or glare which would adversely affect day <br />or nighttime views in the area? <br />Less than <br />significant <br />impact <br />No No No No <br /> <br />a) Scenic Vista <br />Would the project: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? <br />The 1998 HVSP FEIR determined that the proposed residential development would not diminish the <br />scenic value of the ridges and hills visible from Happy Valley or elsewhere in Pleasanton and would <br />not occur in visible ridgeline locations. The 1998 HVSP FEIR determined that development in the <br />adjacent Spotorno Upper Valley Medium Density Residential area, which is not part of the proposed <br />project, could result in a concern about the loss of vistas of open hillsides from the I-680 corridor. <br />However, t he 1998 HVSP FEIR concluded that because the distance from the I-680 corridor is so <br />great, the potential for adverse aesthetic impacts would be minimal. The 1998 HVSP FEIR <br />determined that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of a visual analysis. <br />Additionally, the 1998 HVSP FEIR required site development standards and design guidelines, <br />including Mitigation Measure (MM) L1, MM L2-3, MM L4, and MM L6 (See Appendix A) to address <br />visual quality of development and minimize the visibility of development to the fullest extent
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.