Laserfiche WebLink
8.A. - Page 363 <br />an 8.A. - Page 121 <br />=nag IOv*vIrWF* <br />Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council <br />August 15, 2411 <br />Page 10 <br />thatt dm proposed mitigation measures will reduce the arviroamoval impacts to <br />an indi kart level as the EIR Wo such cxidcel evidence as bank exon <br />studies and geotechnical investigations. <br />CEQA's Appeanft G EnvironmmW cheddist Form omdates identification and <br />analysis of significant wathadc impacts, including udepidation of the existing <br />visual cbamm w or quality of the site ad its sarmrmdirW and "substantial <br />adverse effect on a scenic vista." The EIR fails to adogwWY ukatify sad <br />mWyze these impacts. For example, the Ellet grmutly wo WOdmates the amurrnt <br />of concrete and other u siodymeteriala that will be viable from a project of this <br />size and ateepneas, as well as the lack of hillside thal will be available for any <br />planting due to the d*wopordonaWy large square wW per homer that is <br />proposed. (See e.g.. Aesthetic, Wigatien Measures 1-4 ceiling for landscaping <br />planus, street lighting; plans and vegetation sea wning) The COMIniffiioner8` statod <br />intention w wast for lasndscaping ad offer aesthetic -related pleas at the time of <br />pcsmit gVrml is c mtcr to the CRQA's very purpose. Le.. to prevent the <br />degradation of the visual character and quality of the site and its stur OmxVUV- <br />If the City does not yet 3=w how develWnant is going to appem' visually, it <br />cannot eowJude on the basis of substantial record evi le m 0& these is no <br />aesthetic impa&. <br />The EIR does not address potential soil erosion caused by the loss of more than <br />91 trees from the steeply sloped site. First, the loss of canopy cover will expose <br />the hillside to heavier and direct rain during storms and the drying closets of direct <br />sus exposure in the summer. Second, the lose of well-established root systems <br />will reduce soil stability is that both the ntmaive cxistbg root W*nu that help <br />hold the steep hillside (including cme dwh and banks) in place, and the <br />waterinolding capacity of the hillside (through the root systems) will be <br />permanently removed. <br />Seve Wy leaning trees and utility poles, pulled by constat erosion, are clearly <br />visible on the steeper lots, providing eWdenoe of erosion and hillside instability. <br />The removal of over half of the trees which cunrently Contribute to rho hillside's <br />stabilization (both above and below Laurel Way) is proposed to be'tfl igated" by <br />replacement trees that will tame over 5 years to establish a mot system and provide <br />r"tobiliraiion support. In the interim period, this hillside camel easily fail <br />putting other nearby ruts and p mperty at substantial rink. (See„ e.g., <br />"Landslide in Pittsburg imperils seven homes: Officials investigate potcnndAl <br />reasons for half -arae slide, developer ofnearby subdivision puts evacuees up in <br />hotels." Contra Costa Times (Wahwt Crc, CA). McC%lakry-'I'rlbane <br />