My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
8F Consent 2007 0220
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2007
>
Packet 2007 0220
>
8F Consent 2007 0220
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2019 9:17:14 AM
Creation date
2/22/2007 10:04:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Staff Report
Document Date (6)
2/20/2007
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2007 0220
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2007\Packet 2007 0220
Reso 2007-014
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: <br />1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by <br />the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact'' <br />answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not <br />apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact'' <br />answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., <br />the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). <br />2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, <br />cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational <br />impacts. <br />3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist <br />answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or <br />less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an <br />effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the <br />determination is made, an EIR is required. <br />4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation <br />of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a ''Less Than <br />Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they <br />reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," <br />may be cross-referenced). <br />5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an <br />effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In <br />this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: <br />a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. <br />b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the <br />scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, <br />and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier <br />analysis. <br />C) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures <br />Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the <br />earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. <br />6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for <br />potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside <br />document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is <br />substantiated. <br />7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals <br />contacted should be cited in the discussion. <br />8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies <br />should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental <br />effects in whatever format is selected_ <br />9) The explanation of each issue should identify: <br />a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and <br />b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance <br />envcheck wpd-7 2/30;98 -4- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.