Laserfiche WebLink
selected since they represent the areas where other proposed and approved mining projects are <br /> located and where the effects resulting from the project could contribute to the cumulative <br /> environmental impacts. There are no other types of projects,such as large residential, <br /> commercial or industrial development in the vicinity of the project. (Draft EIR,pp. 6-3, 6-5.) <br /> The locations of these approved and/or pending projects are shown in Figures 6-1 and 6-2 of the <br /> Draft EIR.' (Draft EK p. 6-5.) <br /> The detailed discussion for the following Cumulative Impacts and their respective mitigation <br /> measures,if any, are set forth above in greater detail in Sections D.1 through D.3 (above) of <br /> these CEQA findings. <br /> Cumulative Impacts Considered to be Less than Significant and Requiring No Mitigation <br /> Impact 6.1: Cumulative Land Use Compatibility Impacts. (Draft EIR p.6-8.) <br /> Impact 6.2: Cumulative Agricultural Productivity Impacts. (Draft EIR pp. 6-8.to 6-9.) <br /> Impact 6.6 Cumulative Slope Stability Impacts. (Draft EIR p. 6-12.) <br /> Findings for Cumulative Impacts Considered to be Less than Significant and Requiring No <br /> Mitigation: <br /> The Commission finds that the project in conjunction with past,present and future development <br /> of adjacent areas would not have a sign ficant or potentially significant effect on land use <br /> compatibility, agricultural productivity, or slope stability. After consideration of the impacts <br /> listed above(and in Section D.1 of these findings) the County concludes that the cumulative <br /> impacts listed in this section are less than significant when combined with other related projects <br /> and therefore require no mitigation. <br /> Cumulative Impacts Considered to be Significant but Mitigated to Less Than Significant <br /> Levels <br /> Impact 6.3: Cumulative Traffic Impacts. (Draft EIR pp. 6-9 to 6-10.) <br /> Impact 6.7.• Cumulative Groundwater Consumption and Quality Impacts on the Lower Tulare <br /> Formation Aquifer. (Draft EIR pp. 6-12 to 6-14.) <br /> Impact 6.8: Cumulative Impacts Related to Reduction in Flows to the San Joaquin River. (Draft <br /> EIR p. 6-14.) <br /> Impact 6.9: Cumulative Biological Resource Impacts. (Draft EIR pp. 6-14 to 6-15.) <br /> Impact 6.1 D: Cumulative Cultural Resource Impacts. (Draft EIR p. 6-15.) <br /> Findings for Cumulative Impacts Considered to be Significant or Potentially Significant <br /> and Mitigated to Less Than Significant Levels: <br /> The Commission finds that absent mitigation, the project in conjunction with past,present and <br /> E <br />