My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0005222 (2)
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CITY OF LATHROP
>
0
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
PA-0500408
>
SU0005222 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2020 11:17:08 AM
Creation date
9/6/2019 10:48:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0005222
PE
2675
FACILITY_NAME
PA-0500408
STREET_NUMBER
0
STREET_NAME
CITY OF LATHROP
City
LATHROP
APN
MANY
ENTERED_DATE
7/22/2005 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
CITY OF LATHROP
RECEIVED_DATE
7/22/2005 12:00:00 AM
P_LOCATION
07
P_DISTRICT
003
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\wng
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\L\LATHROP\0\PA-0500408\SU0005222\DEIR.PDF
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
155
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
)nitial Study—LID Annexation <br /> EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: <br /> 1) 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' <br /> answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not <br /> apply to projects like the one involved(e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact' <br /> answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards(e.g., <br /> the project will not 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 <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,or <br /> 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 /> 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 <br /> Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures,and briefly explain how <br /> they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier <br /> Analyses,"may be cross-referenced). <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. 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 <br /> document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is <br /> 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 /> 8) 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 projects environmental <br /> effects in 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 /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.