2500 Planning - Report Regarding EIRs & Drainage, Geologica Problems or GradingDATE:
TO:
City opeottin
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
AGENDA ITEM 3D
FEBRUARY 27, 1995
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY
COUNCIL
ATTENTION: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
SUBJECT: REPORT REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS
(EIR'S) AND DRAINAGE, GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS, OR
GRADING
BACKGROUND
At the January 23, 1995 meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Godrey Pernell requested
information about Environmental Impact Reports (EIR's) and when they are
initiated for projects in the City of Rolling Hills.
The City Council adopted procedures implementing Local CEQA Guidelines on July
13, 1992. As was noted at the January 23, 1995 Council meeting, a majority of the
projects in the City are exempt from California Environmental Quality Act review
(i.e., a new single family dwelling, additions to a single family dwelling, and
accessory structures to a single family dwelling). However, each discretionary
project application requires an environmental checklist (attached) to be filled out by
the applicant for staff review. But, usually, as noted on the attached Appendix B, if a
project is exempt from CEQA, no EIR is required.
On the other hand, tennis courts and subdivisions, are not exempt from CEQA
review. Planning staff regularly prepares an Initial Study Checklist, documentation,
notices to adjacent cities, the County Clerk and the public of these projects on a case -
by -case basis. For subdivisions and other than local impact, the report must also be
reviewed by the State and a variety of agencies (i.e., State Clearinghouse, State Fish
& Game, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Coastal
Commission South Coast District, Native American Heritage Commission, and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).
Staff has prepared Negative Declarations or Mitigated Negative Declarations for
tennis court and subdivision projects that have been approved by the Planning
Commission or City Council.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS
PAGE 1
®Panted nn Recicled Parts
But, that does not mean that the Planning Commission or City Council in a
particular case or situation cannot call for an Environmental Impact Report or
perhaps, a focused EIR referring to a particular environmental factor that would
pose a"Potentially Significant Impact." In the recent past, a request for Site Plan
Review in the Faver case at 5 Southfield Drive required a focused EIR regarding
geologic stability of the site. On the basis of that report, the project was denied.
And, all along the way of the discretionary hearing process, there are other avenues
to discuss publicly factors that could be of "Potentially Significant Impact" to require
an EIR, for example:
One of the policies of the Rolling Hills General Plan is to maintain strict grading
practices to preserve the community's natural terrain;
Title 15 (Building and Construction) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code includes
the requirement of a grading permit for cuts and/or fills or a combination thereof
that are more than 3 feet deep and more than 2,000 square feet. Another
requirement is a balanced cut and fill soils ratio for development projects;
The Zoning Code does not permit more than 40% of the net lot area of a lot to be
disturbed; and
Site Plan Review requires that for any grading, addition, or new structures that the
existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native
vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and
knolls) be preserved, that the development plan follow the natural contours of the
site to minimize grading and that the natural drainage courses be maintained, and
that a project preserve the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing
building coverage by not exceeding limits of structural coverage of the lot, total lot
coverage, and even pad coverage.
In addition, Building and Safety requires certain reviews for all projects, (i.e.,
Geology and Soils testing for all new structures and additions, Fire Department
review of all projects that are not within 450 feet of a fire hydrant, and Health
Department review of septic tanks for new structures or additions.
Recently, staff acquired a copy of a revised Environmental Checklist Form from the
State Legislature's 1994 adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines that
broaden supporting information required, especially in the areas of Geologic
Problems and Water (Appendix I attached). The Checklist includes the following
environmental factors that might be potentially affected: Land Use and Planning,
Population and Housing, Geological Problems, Water, Air Quality,
Transportation/Circulation, Biological Resources, Energy or Mineral Resources,
Hazards (Toxic, health, Sr Fire), Noise, Public Services, Utilities and Service Systems,
Aesthetics, Cultural Resources, Recreation, and Mandatory Findings of Significance.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS
PAGE 2
The existing City of Rolling Hills' Checklist Form can also be amended to include
the City Council's concerns regarding specific threshholds of drainage, geology,
unusual features, or grading.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council review and receive and file this report or
provide staff direction regarding this subject.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS
PAGE 3
Date Filed
City opeolliny
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
(To Be Completed By Applicant)
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274
1310) 377.1521
FAX (310) 377.7288
Zoning Case No.
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Applicant(s) Tel. (
Address
2. Legal Owners) Tel. ( )
Address
3. Project Address
Assessor's Book No. Lot No.
4. Other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by
city, regional, state and federal agencies:
5. Existing zoning district
6. Proposed project/use of site
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
7. Site size
8. Net lot area
9. Total square footage of structures
10. Number of floors of construction
11. Basement square footage
12. Total combined flatwork and structural lot coverage
13. Will any exterior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls?
14. Will any interior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls?
15. Will the entire building structure require a new roof?
16. Will the existing roof remain intact, with less than 200 square feet added?
17. Will cut and fill be balanced? Amount cut Amount fill
18. Area of disturbance. Square feet Percentage of lot
19. If residential, include the unit size. Square feet
20. If commercial, indicate the type of project, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square
footage of sales area, estimated employment per shift and loading facilities.
21. If industrial, indicate the type of project, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities.
22. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy,
loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project.
23. Attach plans.
24.. Proposed scheduling.
25. If the project involves a site plan review, variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and
indicate clearly why the application is required.
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach
additional sheets as necessary).
YES NQ
26. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, lakes or hills, or substantial
alteration of ground contours.
27. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or
roads.
28. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project.
-2-
29. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
30. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes, or odors in vicinity.
31. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water quality or quantity, or alteration
of existing draining patterns.
32. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
33. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more.
_ 34. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable
or explosives.
35. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.).
36. Substantially increased fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.).
37. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
38. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil
stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing
structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or
polaroid photos will be accepted.
39. ; Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural,
historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land
use (one -family, guest house, office use, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, set -back, rear
yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted.
3
ENVIRONMENTAL, IMPACTS
(Please explain all 'yes' and 'maybe answers on separate sheets.)
Mi MAYBE NQ
40. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering
of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique
geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on
or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes
in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the
channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any
bay, inlet or lake?
g.
Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as
earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or
similar hazards
41. Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally or regionally?
42. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of
surface water quality, including but not limited to
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise
available for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property to water -related hazards
such as flooding or tidal waves?
j. Significant changes in the temperature, flow, or chemical
content of surface thermal springs?
43. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species
of plants (including tress, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora
and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered
species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a
barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
44. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species
or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms,
insects or microfauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered
species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result
in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
45. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
46. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare?
47. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the
present or planned land use of an area?
YES MAYBE ED
48. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource?
49. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemical or
radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an
emergency evacuation plan?
50. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution,
density, or growth rate of the human population of an area?
51. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a
demand for additional housing?
52. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new
parking?
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of
people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles?
53. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in
a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following
areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
54. Enerev.. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of
energy, or require the development of new sources of energy?
55. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
56. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard
excluding .mental health?
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
57. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any
scenic vista or view. open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
58. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the
quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?
59. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the
destruction of a prehistoric or historic archeological
site?
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic
effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure,
or object?
c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical
change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred
uses within the potential impact area?
60. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to
the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-
term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term
impacts will endure well into the future.)
c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? (A project may affect two or
more separate resources where the impact is relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effect on human beings, either directly
or indirectly?
NOTE: Before the Lead Agency can accept this application as complete, the applicant must consult the lists
prepared pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and submit a signed statement indicating whether
the project and any alternatives are located on a site which is induded on any such list, and shall specify any list.
HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT
The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are contained on the lists compiled
pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. Accordingly, the project applicant is required to submit
a signed statement which contains the following information:
1. Name of applicant:
2. Address:
3. Phone Number:
4. Address of Site (street name and number if available, and ZIP code):
5. Local Agency (city/county):
6 Assessor's book, page, and parcel number:
7. Specify any list pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code: STATE OF CALIFORNIA
HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES SITES LIST (available at City Hall).
8. Regulatory identification number:
9. Date of List: JULY 1992
Date
Signature
For
Applicant
-9-
NOTE: In the event that the project site and any alternatives are not listed on any list compiled pursuant to
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, then the applicant must certify that fact as provided below.
I have consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 659623 of the Government Code and hereby certify that
the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are ngs contained on these lists.
Date
Signature
For
Applicant
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the
data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements,
and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and belief.
Date
Signature
For
Applicant
forms\environm.app
California State Clearinghouse Handbook
Appendix B
LEAD AGENCY DECISION TO PREPARE AN EIR
Action
Proposed
Not a
Project
Ministerial
Project
i
Discretionary
Project
Exempt
from CEQA
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
No Impacts
NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
Impacts
NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
WI MITIGATION
NO EIR REQUIRED
PREPARE
EIR
Appendix I
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title:
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
4. Project Location:
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
6. General Plan Designation: 7. Zoning:
S. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project:
and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary ,or its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary)
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings)
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required
(e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.)
I-1
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
e environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one irnpact
that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
❑ Land Use and Planning 0 Transportation/Circulation 0 Public Services
❑ Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources 0 Utilities and Service Systems
❑ Geological Problems 0 Energy and Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics
❑ Water 0 Hazards 0 Cultural Resources
❑ Air Quality 0 Noise 0 Recreation
0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency.)
the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect
1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the
effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
1-2
1
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT
be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Signature Date
Printed Name For
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately suoeoned
by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Imoac:"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does no:
apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Irnoac:"
answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.c
the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening
analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site,
cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as ope:ationai
impacts.
3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is sigrtific n:If
there are one or more "Potentially Significant Lmpact" entries when the determination is made, an ELR is
required.
"Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Siariificaric Lrnpac:."
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the e:
a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section YVII. "Eariier Analyses," may be cross-
referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program ELR, or other CEQA process. an
effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D).
Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential Lmpacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
document should. where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is
substantiated. See the sample question below. A source list should be attached, and other sources used
or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
7) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different ones.
4)
SAMPLE QUESTION:
Pocadally
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Thu:.
Signircact Mid¢auon Sieninc;n t No
Issues (mod Supporting Information Sources):
impact 'Incorporated Impact L:.pac:
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
Landslides or mudslides? (1, 6)
(Attached source list explains that 1 is the general
plan, and 6 is a USGS topo map. Tnis answer would
probably not need further explanation.)
I-4.
n
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless Less Than
Mitigation Significant No
Incorporated Impact impact
a) Conflict with general plan designation ❑ 0 0 D
or zoning? (source i(s): )
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans 0 0 0 0
or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the project? ( )
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the O
vicinity? ( )
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations 0
(e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts
from incompatible land uses)? ( )
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement 0 0 0 G
of an established community (including a low-
income or minority community)? ( )
0 0 0
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local 0 0
population projections? ( )
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either 0 0
directly or indirectly *(e.g. through projects
in an undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)? ( )
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable 0
housing? ( )
I-5
0
0 0 0
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the
proposal result in or expose people to potential
impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? () 0 0 0
b) Seismic ground shaking O 0 0 0
c) Seismic ground failure, including 0 0 G
liquefaction? ( )
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( ) 0 0 E
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) 0 0 0
f) Erosion, changes in topography or 0 0 0
unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading, or fill? ( )
g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) 0 0 1 h) Expansive soils? ( ) . 0 0 0
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) 0 ❑
0
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( )
b) Exposure of people or property to water related 0 0
hazards such as flooding? ( )
1-6
0 0
0
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
f '
do
Impact
c) Discharge into surface waters or other
alteration of surface water quality (e.g.
temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity)? ( ) 0 0
d) Changes in the amount of surface water 0 0 0 r
in any water body? ( )
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction 0 0 0 '- =
of water movements? ( )
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either 0 0 0
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? ( )
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of 0 0 0 0
groundwater? ( )
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ❑ 0
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of 0 0 0
groundwater otherwise available for
public water supplies? ( )
V. AM QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to 0 0 0 r-:
an existing or projected air quality violation? ( )
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) 0 0 ❑
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, 0 0 ❑
or cause any change in climate? ( )
d) •. Create objectionable odors? ( ) 0 0 0
I-7
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated impact
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. ❑
Would the. proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) 0 ❑
b) Hazards to safety from design features ❑ 0
(e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? ( )
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to 0 ❑
nearby uses? ( )
d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or ❑ ❑
off -site? ( )
0 0
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or
bicyclists? ( )
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting ❑ 0
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? ( )
a)
Rail, waterborne or air traffic
impacts? ( )
No
Impact
0 0
❑ 0
0
❑ ❑ 0
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their 0 ❑ 0
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds)? ( )
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage ❑ 0 C
trees)? ( )
I-8
r
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
c) Locally designated natural communities 0 0 0
(e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( )
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and 0 0 0
vernal pool)? ( )
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration ❑ 0 0
corridors? ( )
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation ❑
plans? ( )
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and 0
inefficient manner? ( )
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known 0
mineral resource that would be of future value
to the region and the residents of the State? ( )
0
0
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: -
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of 0 0 0
hazardous substances (including, but not limited to:
oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? ( )
b) Possible interference with an emergency 0
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (
c) The creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard? ( )
d) Exposure of people to existing sources
of potential health hazards? ( )
I-9
❑
0
❑
n
\o
Impact
ti
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant do
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable 0
brush, grass, or trees? (
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
0
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) 0 0 0
b) Exposure of people to severe noise 0 0 0
levels? ( )
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? ( ) 0 0
b) Police protection? ( ) ❑ ❑ 0 0
c) Schools? ( ) 0 0
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including ❑ 0 ❑
roads? ( )
e) Other governmental services? (
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or
supplies, or substantial alterations to the following
utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? (
b) Communications systems? (
I-10
0 0
- Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact incorporated Impact Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
c) Local or regional water treatment or
distribution facilities? ( )
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( )
e) Storm water drainage? ( )
f) Solid waste disposal? ( )
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( )
❑ ❑ ❑
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic 0
highway? ( )
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic D
effect? ( )
c) Create light or glare? ( ) 0
0
n
0
❑ O C
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) 0 ❑ 0
Ci
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) 0 0 0
c) Affect historical resources? ( ) 0 0 0 C
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change 0 0 0 -'
which would affect unique ethnic cultural
values? ( )
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses ❑ ❑
within the potential impact area? (
Potentially
Signiiicant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
impact Incorporated Impact impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or
regional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (
0
XVI. MANDATORY FLND[NGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade 0
the quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to
achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental goals?
I-12
O
O
G
0 C
1
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated• Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
c) Does the project have impacts that are 0 0 [3
individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects)
d) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
0
I I
Nc
1'VH. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, Cr other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following
on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for.
review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an -earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures base::
on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from
the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the
project.
Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 210S7.
Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21080(c), 21080.1. 21080.3, 210S2.1, 210S3, 213:33:3, 21093. 2109.:
21151; Sundsrrom v. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988); Leono ; v. Afonterev Board of
Supervisors. 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990).
1-13