My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
5B CONSENT
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2024
>
Packet 20240402
>
5B CONSENT
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/19/2024 9:24:00 AM
Creation date
4/19/2024 9:10:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Staff Report
Document Date (6)
4/2/2024
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
Reso 2024-029 MND for WPCP Treatment Wetland and Shoreline Resilience Project
(Amended)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2024
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
372
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
3. Environmental Checklist <br /> <br />San Leandro Treatment Wetland <br />IS/MND <br />3-3 February 2024 <br /> <br />3.2. Aesthetics <br />ISSUES <br />POTENTIALLY <br />SIGNIFICANT <br />IMPACT <br />LESS THAN <br />SIGNIFICANT <br />WITH <br />MITIGATION <br />INCORPORATED <br />LESS THAN <br />SIGNIFICANT <br />IMPACT <br />NO IMPACT <br />Would the Project: <br />a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic <br />vista? <br />☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ <br />b) Substantially damage scenic resources, <br />including, but not limited to, trees, rock <br />outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state <br />scenic highway? <br />☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ <br />c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the <br />existing visual character or quality of public views of <br />the site and its surroundings? (Public views are <br />those that are experienced from publicly accessible <br />vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, <br />would the project conflict with applicable zoning and <br />other regulations governing scenic quality? <br />☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ <br />d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare <br />which would adversely affect day or nighttime views <br />in the area? <br />☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ <br />Discussion <br />a) Effect on scenic vistas: The Proposed Project site is situated in a developed industrial zone at the <br />western end of Davis Street. Nearby facilities include the WPCP sludge drying beds and solar array, a <br />waste transfer facility, OAK Airport, and a shooting range, all of which define the visual character of the <br />area. The Project does not involve the construction of any new above-grade structures that would <br />obstruct scenic vistas. Instead, it is expected to improve the ecological conditions and visual <br />attractiveness of the site. Consequently, the Project's implementation will not have any adverse <br />impact on the area's aesthetics. <br />Impact Designation: No Impact <br />b) Damage to scenic resources: There are no designated scenic resources in the vicinity of the Project. <br />There would be no impact to aesthetics associated with Project implementation. <br />Impact Designation: No Impact <br />c) Degrade public views: The Project is expected to improve the existing visual character and quality of <br />public views from the Bay Trail and Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline and is consistent with existing <br />public and industrial facilities and visual quality of the area. Therefore, there would be no impact to <br />aesthetics associated with Project implementation. <br />Impact Designation: No Impact
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.