RES 221270 - Laserfiche WebLink

Environmental Checklist Hydrology and Water Quality Final Initial Study – Negative Declaration 61 c. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:  Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?  Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?  Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?  Impede or redirect flood flows? Implementation of several CAP 2.0 strategies and actions may promote infrastructure development and small-scale construction activities within Pleasanton. CAP 2.0 Strategies BE-1, BE-2, and BE-3 promote building electrification in new and existing buildings and installation of solar PV systems and battery storage facilities to provide greener renewable electricity within the City. CAP 2.0 Action P5 supports the installation of new EV charging stations and supporting infrastructure. CAP 2.0 Action P13 provides for the planting of additional urban trees throughout the community. Additionally, CAP 2.0 Action P15 incentivizes water efficiency retrofits to existing buildings and landscaped areas, and Action S8 seeks to increase green stormwater infrastructure within Pleasanton. Implementation of these CAP 2.0 actions would primarily occur within previously developed areas and would not result in substantial alterations to Pleasanton’s existing drainage pattern and amount of impervious surface. Construction of CAP 2.0 projects could result in erosion as discussed in Section 7, Geology and Soils. However, impacts to drainage and water quality during construction would be minimized through the implementation of BMPs as required by the Pleasanton Standard Specifications and Details and NPDES Construction General Permit program. In addition, CAP 2.0 projects would be in accordance with the Pleasanton General Plan, which includes goals and policies for the protection and preservation of creeks, streams, and groundwater within Pleasanton.71 Furthermore, CAP 2.0 Actions S8 and P13 would increase permeable surfaces and landscaping within Pleasanton, which would improve drainage and water quality. Therefore, the CAP 2.0 would result in a no impact related to the alteration of existing drainage patterns. d. Would the project result in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Pleasanton is not located within designated seiche or tsunami zones. Portions of the City are within the 100- and 500-year flood zones defined by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the City also contains areas within the inundation zone of the Del Valle Dam located to the southeast of the City.72 Therefore, areas of the City are at risk of flooding. As described under Response 10c., CAP 2.0 projects would not impede or redirect flood flows, and as discussed under Response 9 a. and b. in Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, CAP 2.0 projects would generally not involve the regular use or storage of hazardous materials with the exception of battery energy storage facilities that include the storage of lithium-ion batteries. Future CAP 2.0 projects, such as battery energy storage facilities, would be reviewed for compliance with the applicable local 71 Pleasanton, City of. 2009. Pleasanton General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element. Available: <https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=23910>. Accessed October 7, 2021. 72 Pleasanton, City of. 2009. Pleasanton General Plan Public Safety Element. Available: <https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=23899>. Accessed October 13, 2021.