My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
Reso 23-09 PC Reso 0034 Reso Recommending CEQA Approval - 505 E. Bayshore
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
Planning Commission
>
2023
>
Reso 23-09 PC Reso 0034 Reso Recommending CEQA Approval - 505 E. Bayshore
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/22/2023 3:38:39 PM
Creation date
6/22/2023 3:37:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Resolution
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
Planning Commission
Date
5/16/2023
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ATTY/RESO.0034/PC RESO RECOMMENDING CEQA APPROVAL – 505 E. BAYSHORE – EXHIBIT A <br />REV: 05-12-23 JB <br />Page 8 of 30 <br /> <br />Impact CUL-2: The Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the <br />significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section <br />15064.5. <br /> <br />Impact CUL-3: The Project would not disturb any human remains, including those. <br />interred outside of dedicated cemeteries. <br /> <br />Impact CUL-C: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable <br />contribution to a significant cultural resources impact. <br /> <br />6. Energy These findings regarding the Project’s potential impacts relating to geology, soils <br />and seismicity are based on the analyses on pages 87 to 94 of the DEIR, which are hereby <br />incorporated herein in its entirety. <br /> <br />Impact EN-1: The Project would not result in a potentially significant <br />environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of <br />energy resources, during project construction or operation. <br /> <br />Impact EN-2: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan <br />for renewable energy or energy efficiency. <br /> <br />Impact EN-3: The Project would not result in a substantial increase in demand <br />upon energy resources in relation to projected supplies. <br /> <br />Impact EN-C: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable <br />contribution to a significant energy impact. <br /> <br />7. Geology, Soils and Seismicity. These findings regarding the Project’s potential impacts <br />relating to geology, soils and seismicity are based on the analyses on pages 95 to 102 of <br />the DEIR, which are hereby incorporated herein in its entirety. <br /> <br />Impact GEO-1: The Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential <br />substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving <br />rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo <br />Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based <br />on other substantial evidence of a known fault; strong seismic ground shaking; <br />seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or landslides. <br /> <br />Impact GEO-2: The Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of <br />topsoil. <br /> <br />Impact GEO-3: The Project would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is <br />unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially <br />result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or <br />collapse.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.