Laserfiche WebLink
TA. - Page 63 <br />Conclusion Regarding Impacts on Historic Resources <br />Based on the above discussion, no additional project impacts on historic resources would result. DTPP program <br />EIR Mitigations 7-2, 7-3, and 7-4, regarding historic resources, have been completed and no additional mitigation <br />is required. <br />b. & d. The proposed project would not cause a potentially significant impact to any known (recorded) archaeological <br />resources in the project vicinity. However, the Downtown Precise Plan program EIR (pp. 7-33 through 7-35) <br />concluded that there is a high potential for new development facilitated by the DTPP to disturb unrecorded <br />archaeological resources, which represented a potentially significant impact. Mitigation 7-1 of the Downtown <br />Precise Plan program EIR requires that in the event that any deposits of prehistoric or historic archaeological <br />materials are encountered during project construction activities, all work within an appropriate buffer area shall be <br />stopped and a qualified archaeologist meeting Federal criteria under 36 CFR 61 shall be contacted to assess the <br />deposit and make recommendations, possibly including complete avoidance of the resources, in-place preservation, <br />and/or data recovery. This measure, which shall be required as a condition ofproject approval, would reduce the <br />potential impacts of the project on archaeological resources to a less -than -significant level. <br />c. The proposed project would not cause a potentially significant impact to any known (recorded) paleontological <br />resources in the project vicinity. However, the Downtown Precise Plan program EIR (p. 7-41) concluded that <br />earthmoving activity associated with DTPP facilitated development could potentially disrupt, alter, or eliminate as - <br />yet undiscovered paleontological resources, which represented a potentially significant impact. Mitigation 7-5 of the <br />Downtown Precise Plan program EIR requires that prior to the issuance of grading or demolition permits, the <br />Planning, Housing, and Economic Development Department (now the Community Development Department), in <br />coordination with a qualified paleontologist, assess individual development proposals for the potential to destroy <br />unique paleontological resources and to determine provisions to protect such resources when applicable, possibly <br />including complete avoidance of the resources, in-place preservation, and/or data recovery as detailed in Mitigation <br />7-1. This measure, which shall be required as a condition of project approval, would reduce the potential impacts <br />of the project on paleontological resources to a less -than -significant level. <br />e. The proposed project would not cause a potentially significant impact to any known cemeteries or human remains in <br />the project vicinity (DTPP EIR p. 7-7). However, should any human remains be found during on- or off-site <br />improvements associated with the proposed project, the City of Redwood City Cultural Resources Management Plan <br />guidelines and EIR Mitigation 7-1 require that construction activities be halted immediately and the County coroner <br />and a professional archaeologist be consulted to evaluate the significance of the find. If the remains are Native <br />American, the Native American Heritage Commission is required to be notified. These measures, which shall be <br />required as conditions of project approval, would reduce the potential impacts of the project on human remains to a <br />less -than -significant level. <br />Summary of Impacts <br />Potentially Less than Significant Less than <br />Significant With Mitigation Significant No <br />Impact Incorporated Impact Impact <br />VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project: <br />a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including <br />the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: <br />The project would not create new geologic hazards that could damage project <br />or nearby facilities. Therefore, this section focuses on the effect of local <br />geologic conditions and activity on the proposed project. <br />i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent <br />Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State <br />Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known <br />fault (Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42)? <br />ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X <br />iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? X <br />iv) Landslides? <br />b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X <br />i[. <br />X <br />X <br />