My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0014047
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
B
>
BETHANY
>
0
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
LAFC 24-20
>
SU0014047
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/7/2021 1:53:35 PM
Creation date
6/7/2021 1:50:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0014047
PE
2688
FACILITY_NAME
LAFC 24-20
STREET_NUMBER
0
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
BETHANY
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
MOUNTAIN HOUSE
Zip
95304-
APN
20916009
ENTERED_DATE
4/2/2021 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
0 W BETHANY RD
RECEIVED_DATE
4/1/2021 12:00:00 AM
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\tsok
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
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).
View images
View plain text
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: <br />1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately <br />supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. <br />A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the <br />impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault <br />rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors <br />as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based <br />on a project-specific screening analysis). <br />2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, <br />cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational <br />impacts. <br />3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist <br />answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, <br />or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence <br />that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when <br />the determination is made, an EIR is required. <br />4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the <br />incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a <br />"Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly <br />explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier <br />Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). <br />5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, <br />an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section <br />15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: <br />Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. <br />Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within <br />the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal <br />standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based <br />on the earlier analysis. <br />Mitigation Measures. -For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures <br />Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the <br />earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. <br />6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for <br />potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or <br />outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the <br />statement is substantiated. <br />7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or <br />individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. <br />8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead <br />agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's <br />environmental effects in whatever format is selected. <br />9) The explanation of each issue should identify: <br />the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and <br />the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. <br />PA-2000063(MP), PA-2000064(SP), & PA-2000065(SA) — Initial Study 4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.