Laserfiche WebLink
Environmental Checklist <br />Aesthetics <br />Environmental Consistency Checklist Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 21 <br />c.Would the project, in non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character <br />or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are <br />experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, <br />would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic <br />quality? <br />The project site is in an urbanized area and is designed to comply with massing and height standards <br />listed under the SLZC Chapter 2.04. The project would be required to undergo the site plan review <br />process as detailed in SLZC Chapter 5.12 and comply with General Plan Policies CD-5.4 and LU-2.8 <br />which require infill housing to be architecturally consistent with existing development to ensure <br />aesthetic compatibility with existing surrounding uses. Therefore, as the project would undergo site <br />plan review and would be within the setback and height requirements that govern scale and <br />massing as listed under SLZC Chapter 2.04, it would not conflict with applicable zoning and other <br />regulations. Impacts would be less than significant. <br />d.Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect <br />daytime or nighttime views in the area? <br />The project would be required to comply with SLZC Section 4.04.340 which ensures minimal impacts <br />from glare as well as SLZC Section 2.04.324 which provides daylight plane requirements to reduce <br />impacts of light on adjacent properties. In addition, the project would be required to comply with <br />General Plan Policy CD-7.7 which encourages street and parking lot lighting that creates a sense of <br />security, complements building and landscape design, is energy-efficient, considers night sky <br />visibility impacts, and avoids conflicts with nearby residential uses. As the project would be designed <br />consistent with this policy, the project would not create sources of light and glare that would <br />adversely affect views. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. <br />Conclusion <br />The project-specific impacts related to aesthetics would be less than significant, and therefore <br />would not be more severe than those identified in the General Plan EIR; thus, the project would not <br />result in new specific effects not addressed in the prior analysis. No new mitigation measures are <br />warranted. Accordingly, no additional environmental review is required.