Laserfiche WebLink
Pi»rlico Drive Trrr»oat and Pipeline Project Environnu~rrtnl Checklist <br />allowed within these zoned areas and do not conflict with any land use plans or policies. <br />Therefore, this would he no impact. <br />c) No Impact. There arc no habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation <br />plans applicable to the project area which is entirely urbanized. Therefore, this would be <br />no impact. <br />10. MINERAL RESOURCES <br />Existing Setting <br />The proposed project area has not been identified as having mineral resources (City of <br />Pleasanton 1996). <br />Standards of Significance <br />For purposes of this environmental document, an impact is considered significant if the proposed <br />project would: <br />• Result in the depletion of a mineral resource. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />SSUeS <br />Po[en[iall~~ <br />Significant <br />Impact Less than <br />Significant <br />Wi[h Mitigation <br />Incorporated <br />Less Than <br />Significant <br />Impact <br /> <br />No <br />Impact <br />Mineral Resources <br />Would the project: <br />a) Result in the loss of availability of a known ~ ~ ~ ^X <br />mineral resource that would be of value to the <br />region and the residents of the state? <br />b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- ~ ~ ~ ^X <br />important mineral resource recovery site <br />delineated on a local general plan, specific plan <br />or other land use plan? <br />Discussion <br />a, b) No Impact. The proposed project area is completely urbanized and not included or <br />delineated as a Mineral Resource Zone or locally important mineral resource recovery <br />site on the 1996 City of Pleasanton General Plan update (City of Pleasanton 1996). The <br />project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource <br />recovery site. Therefore, this would be no impact. <br />City of Pleasanton 39 Winzlcr & Kelly <br />Draft Initial Study/Proposed Negullve Declarahon August 2006 <br />oa26~so~ <br />