My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
Reso24 16252
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
City Council
>
2020-2029
>
2024
>
Reso24 16252
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/29/2024 3:03:46 PM
Creation date
10/29/2024 2:59:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Resolution
Date
10/28/2024
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
140
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
<br />18 <br />Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: <br />(1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by <br />the information sources a lead agency cites following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately <br />supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the <br />one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained <br />where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose <br />sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). <br /> <br />(2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as <br />well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. <br /> <br />(3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers <br />must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation incorporated, <br />or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an <br />effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the <br />determination is made, an EIR is required. <br /> <br />(4) "Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures <br />has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency <br />must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant <br />level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analysis," as explained in [5] below, may be cross-referenced). <br /> <br /> It is noted that many potential environmental impacts can be avoided or reduced through implementation of <br />uniformly applicable development policies, standards, or regulations – such as building and fire codes, design <br />guidelines, a noise ordinance, a historic resource ordinance, a tree preservation ordinance, and other <br />requirements that the lead agency applies uniformly toward all project proposals. Consistent with CEQA <br />streamlining provisions (e.g., Section 15183), these uniformly applied requirements are not distinguished as <br />project-specific “mitigation measures,” primarily because they have already been adopted to avoid or reduce <br />potential environmental impacts of all future project proposals, not only the particular project being evaluated <br />at the moment. <br /> <br />(5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect <br />has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. (CEQA Guidelines Section <br />15063[b][1][c]). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: <br /> <br />(a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. <br /> <br />(b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of <br />and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether <br />such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. <br /> <br />(c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated," describe <br />the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which <br />they address site-specific conditions for the project. <br /> <br />(6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential <br />impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document <br />should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. <br /> <br />(7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals <br />contacted should be cited in the discussion. <br /> <br />ATTY/RESO.0074/CC RESO 847 WOODSIDE (CEQA) - EXHIBIT 1 - CEQA CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST <br />REV: 10-23-24 VR <br /> <br />Page 18 of 135
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.