Laserfiche WebLink
POTENTIALLY <br /> POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS TItAN <br /> NO <br /> ISSUES SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT IMPACT SOURCES <br /> ISSUES MITIGATION IMPACT <br /> INCORPORATED <br /> I21UTILITIES1A STEMS Would!thWici3ect;l nr y nU ` .,;K; ' " a' .;ti �; r „g . : W _.', - S ax$ <br /> a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X 1,2 <br /> applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? <br /> b. Require or result in the construction of new water or X 1,2 <br /> wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of <br /> existing facilities, the construction of which could <br /> cause significant environmental effects? <br /> c. Require or result in the construction of new storm X 1,2 <br /> water drainage facilities or expansion of existing <br /> facilities, the construction of which could cause <br /> significant environmental effects? <br /> d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the X 1,2 <br /> project from existing entitlements and resources, or <br /> are new or expanded entitlements needed? <br /> e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment X 1,2 <br /> provider which serves or may serve the project that it <br /> has adequate capacity to serve the projects projected <br /> demand in addition to the provider's existing <br /> commitments? <br /> f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted X 1,2 <br /> capacity to accommodate the projects solid waste <br /> disposal needs? <br /> g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X 1,2,3 <br /> regulations related to solid waste? <br /> h. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X 1,2,3 <br /> regulations related to discharge of storm waters? <br /> EXPLANATION: <br /> a) The General Plan consistency amendments would not cause the wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional <br /> Water Quality Control Board to be exceeded. The quantity of development accommodated by the amendments was <br /> previously analyzed through the General Plan EIR and the TOD Strategy EIR. Both EIRs determined that the potential <br /> for adverse impacts could be mitigated through General Plan policies. No new or increased impacts above what was <br /> already anticipated in these environmental documents would occur as a result of the proposed amendments. <br /> b) The General Plan consistency amendments would not require the construction of new water or wastewater facilities or <br /> • the expansion of existing facilities. Impacts to water and wastewater treatment facilities were previously analyzed in <br /> . the EIRs for the General Plan and TOD Strategy, as well as subsequent environmental documents prepared for specific <br /> projects. The General Plan and TOD EIRs determined that water and wastewater impacts could be mitigated to less <br /> than significant levels by implementing policies and actions in the General Plan. No new or increased impacts above <br /> what was already anticipated in these environmental documents would occur as a result of the proposed amendments. <br /> c) The consistency amendments would not require the construction or expansion of stormwater drainage facilities. The <br /> TOD Strategy EIR analyzed the storm drainage impacts associated with a particular set of land use designations on a <br /> given set of properties. These designations have been carried forward into the amended General Plan. The TOD EIR <br /> determined that storm drainage impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels by following existing General <br /> Plan policies and actions. These policies would not be changed when the Plan is amended. <br /> TOD and Housing Element General Plan Consistency Amendments January 2011 • Page 21 <br />