3_Exhibit C_ADDENDUM ONLY - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton—Stoneridge Mall Residential Project Section 15183 Checklist/15164 Addendum CEQA Checklist FirstCarbon Solutions 97 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480017/Consistency Checklist/21480017 Stoneridge Mall Residential Project Checklist Addendum_Updated.docx Therefore, the Prior EIR found that implementation of the Housing Element would result in less than significant exposures of people and structures to surface rupture on a known earthquake fault. Analysis of Proposed Project As described above, none of the sites evaluated in the Prior EIR, including the project site, are within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. As with all development within the City, the proposed project would comply with the CBC design standards to minimize adverse effects in the event of surface fault rupture. In addition, the proposed project would follow the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act, the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, and Goal 1, Policies 1 and 2 of the General Plan Public Safety Element, as discussed in the Prior EIR. This would reduce the risk of fault rupture to life and property on the project site. Impacts would continue to be less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary, consistent with the Prior EIR. There are no proposed changes, new circumstances, or new information that would cause new or more severe impacts. Therefore, there are no environmental effects that are peculiar to the proposed project or the parcels on which the proposed project would be located. Impacts would be less than significant and the proposed project would not result in a new or more severe adverse impact that was not previously identified in the Prior EIR. ii) Ground Shaking Prior EIR Conclusions The Prior EIR determined that ‘severe to violent’ and ‘violent’ ground shaking impacts could occur in various areas located within or around the City, especially along the Hayward and Calaveras faults.43 As such, new residential development on the Housing Element’s rezoning sites would be subject to ‘violent’ or ‘severe to violent’ ground shaking. However, the Prior EIR identified various policies in the General Plan Public Safety Element that would minimize the risk from ground shaking, including a requirement for site-specific soil and geological studies that include recommendations for minimizing seismic hazards. These policies are outlined in Goal 2, Policies 5, 6, and 7 of the Public Safety Element of the General Plan. As such, it was determined that impacts regarding the exposure of people or structures to seismic ground shaking effects would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project The seismicity of the project site is governed by the activity of the Calaveras Fault, although ground shaking from future earthquakes on other faults could also be felt at the site.44 The Calaveras Fault is approximately 0.5 mile from the project site and could generate a maximum ground shaking effect of 6.8 on the Maximum Considered Earthquake magnitude scale.45 However, as directed by the Prior EIR, the proposed project would adhere to seismic design standards and General Plan policies listed above in order to minimize ground shaking hazards. Impacts would continue to be less than 43 City of Pleasanton. 2009. Pleasanton General Plan 2005-2025, Public Safety Element. July 21. 44 Terracon Consultants. 2014. Geotechnical Engineering Report – 1 Stoneridge Mall Road. October 13. 45 Ibid.