My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 2
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CAMBRIDGE
>
16470
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544155
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2019 2:31:10 PM
Creation date
2/15/2019 1:45:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
FILE 2
RECORD_ID
PR0544155
PE
3526
FACILITY_ID
FA0000185
FACILITY_NAME
CITY GAS & LIQUOR
STREET_NUMBER
16470
STREET_NAME
CAMBRIDGE
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
LATHROP
Zip
95330
APN
19643032
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
16470 CAMBRIDGE ST
P_LOCATION
07
P_DISTRICT
003
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
WNg
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
286
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
INSTRUCTIONS ON EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: <br /> I) A brief explanation is required for all answers except"No Impact" answers that are adequately supported <br /> by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following.each question. A "No Impact" answer <br /> is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to <br /> projects like the one involved (e.g.,the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should <br /> be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards(e.g.,the project will not <br /> expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based 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 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,or less <br /> than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may <br /> be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact"entries when the determination is made, <br /> 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"Less Than <br /> Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures,and briefly explain how they reduce <br /> the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be <br /> cross-referenced). <br /> 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,an <br /> effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this <br /> case, a brief discussion should identify the following: <br /> a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. <br /> b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the <br /> scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, <br /> and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier <br /> analysis. <br /> C) 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 outside document <br /> should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. <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 /> S) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies <br /> should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in <br /> whatever format is selected. <br /> 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: <br /> a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any,used to evaluate each question;and <br /> b) The mitigation measure identified, if any,to reduce the impact to less than significance <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.