Reso23-02 0009 PC Reso Adopt CEQA

Browse Search

Findings and Statements Required by the California Environmental Quality Act Focused General Plan Update 47 Final Environmental Impact Report January 2023 to the Housing, Built Environment (Land Use), Public Safety, Building Community, and Natural Resources Elements, and the Environmental Justice policies and programs would not occur. With regard to aesthetics, the amount of development potential would be reduced with the No Project Alternative compared to the Project; however new development associated with the No Project Alternative could be taller and more dense than currently exists at certain locations. New development may result in an increase in the number of lighting sources and nighttime lighting within the area. Given that the area is already developed, such increases are not expected to be substantial. The No Project Alternative would result in a similar less-than-significant impact, when compared to the Project. With regard to agriculture and forestry resources, the Planning Area is developed with urban and suburban uses and no land in the Planning Area is considered Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Unique Farmlands nor zoned for agricultural use. In addition, no Williamson Act contracts exist. There is no Timberland, land zoned for Timberland Production, or forest land. The No Project Alternative would result in a similar no impact, when compared to the Project. With regard to air quality, the No Project Alternative would not result in operational emissions that exceed BAAQMD regional CEQA thresholds and would comply with all relevant AQP control measures. However, the No Project Alternative’s construction emissions may exceed BAAQMD thresholds. Further, the No Project Alternative would not provide Environmental Justice policies that work to lessen air quality impacts on disadvantaged communities. The No Project Alternative is considered to have a reduced impacts than the Project, but they would remain significant and unavoidable. With regard to biological resources, the Planning Area contains suitable habitat for special status plant and wildlife species, which applies to both the Project and the No Project Alternative. However, the potential for residential development under the No Project Alternative would be reduced. In addition, several proposed Public Safety Element policies and programs which have been identified as possibly having impacts will not occur, and thus, the possible biological resources impacts associated with these policies will not occur. Therefore, the No Project Alternative would result in fewer impacts than the Project due to the reduced development potential. With regard to cultural resources, development under the No Project Alternative could uncover previously unknown cultural resources or destroy/change structures that could be considered historic, however, General Plan policies require that development or land use proposals with the potential to disturb or destroy sensitive cultural resources need to be evaluated by a qualified professional and, if necessary, incorporate mitigation measures into project approvals. This Alternative would result in a similar less-than-significant impact, when compared to the Project with adherence to existing regulations. With regard to energy, development potential associated with the No Project Alternative would require the consumption of electricity, natural gas, and vehicle fuel resources to accommodate growth, however, the No Project Alternative would have reduced energy