02 ATTACHMENT 1 - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton 2023-2031 (6th Cycle) Housing Element Update CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations FirstCarbon Solutions 19 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480022/FOF/21480022 Pleasanton Housing Element FOF.docx recommendations contained in historical architectural studies regarding rehabilitation or preservation of historically significant structures and sites to be followed. Program 5.3 requires the cessation of all construction and grading activities within the vicinity of any discovered prehistoric or historic artifacts until any such find is evaluated by a qualified professional Archaeologist, and appropriate mitigation is approved by the city. Policy 1 within Goal 2 of the Community Character Elements encourages the retention, use, and enhancement of older buildings of historical importance and architectural heritage. With respect to Site 27 (PUSD-Vineyard), the Vineyard Avenue Corridor Specific Plan includes Policy 1 with the intent of addressing the conservation and protection of historical resources, and Policy 1 requires work to be halted if historic artifacts are found once project construction is underway until a qualified Archaeologist has been consulted. Municipal Code Section 18.140.030 (Fines and Restrictions on Future Development for Illegal Historic Building Demolition) states that any property owner who demolishes, or causes to be demolished, any historic building in the city is subject to fines and restrictions on future development unless the owner received prior written City approval in conjunction with a new development application or other code provision or the chief building and safety official made a determination of a dangerous building. As described above, Site 25 (PUSD- District) is just south of the First, Second Third Street historic neighborhood. The resources within this historic neighborhood could be indirectly adversely affected through incompatible design development on Site 25 (PUSD-District). Policy 4.1 of the Housing Element Update would result in the development of guidelines and standards for residential and mixed-use development that would incorporate Objective Design Standards whenever possible for high-density housing sites, such as Site 25 (PUSD-District), which would ensure subsequent development on Site 25 (PUSD-District) would be consistent with the existing character of the First, Second Third Street historic neighborhood (Program 4.2). Compliance with applicable current federal, State, and local laws as well as the goals, policies, and programs included in the General Plan, described above, would reduce any potential impacts to the resources surrounding Site 25 (PUSD-District). Development applications would be reviewed by the City for compliance with the policies and programs of the General Plan related to the protection of historical resources. The Municipal Code, which implements the General Plan, would be reviewed when development applications are received. Individual development projects which propose to alter a building or structure greater than 45 years of age at the time an application is deemed complete, would be required to undergo project-specific environmental review in compliance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. (Draft Program EIR, Page 3.4-19–20). Potential Effect Impact CUL-2: Development consistent with the Housing Element Update, rezonings, and General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. (Draft Program EIR, Page 3.4-21). Findings: Less than significant impact. Facts in Support of Findings: According to a review of available records by the NWIC, there are several recorded and reported prehistoric and historic archaeological sites in the city. These sites