Impacts and Mitigation Measures. These findings provide the written analysis and conclusions of the Board regarding the environmental impacts of the Project and the mitigation measures identified by the Final EIR and adopted by the Board as conditions of approval for the Project. In making these findings, the Board has considered the opinions of other agencies and members of the public, including opinions that disagree with some of the analysis and significance thresholds used in the EIR. The Board finds that the determination of significance thresholds is a judgment that is within the discretion of the Board; the significance thresholds used in the EIR are supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the expert opinion of the EIR preparers and MRWPCA staff; and the significance thresholds used in the EIR provide reasonable and appropriate means of assessing the significance of the adverse environmental effects of the Project. In particular, the EIR relied on significance criteria for evaluating impacts that are tailored to this type of project. The criteria used in this EIR to determine whether an impact is or is not “significant” are based on (a) CEQA-stipulated “mandatory findings of significance” listed in CEQA Guidelines section 15065; (b) the relationship of the project effect to the adopted policies, ordinances and standards of the MRWPCA and of responsible agencies; and (c) commonly accepted practice and the professional judgment of the EIR authors and MRWPCA staff.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures. This section analyzes the environmental effects that could result from implementing the Proposed SVIP Project, and identifies avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures. Graphic materials consisting of maps, drawings, and photographs will be provided in a consistent format throughout the EIR. They will clearly and accurately depict the project and present environmental data where such data is better understood through photographs and/or maps.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures. 20. Any negative impacts of a sub-project on female-headed households will be taken up on a case-to-case basis and assistance to these households will be treated on a priority basis. The RP will formulate measures to ensure that socio-economic conditions, needs and priorities of women are identified and the process of land acquisition and resettlement does not disadvantage women. The RP will ensure that gender impacts are adequately addressed and mitigated. Women’s focus groups discussions will be conducted to address specific women’s issues. During disbursement of compensation and provision of assistance, priority will be given to female-headed households. Joint ownership in the name of husband and wife will be provided in cases of non-female-headed households.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures. Direct Negative Impacts The preparation of management plans for a protected area involves consultations, studies, mapping, and report writing. These actions will not in themselves cause negative environmental impacts. A protected area management plans may, however, recommend actions that could cause direct and indirect negative environmental impacts. It may include, for example, the construction of infrastructure for administration and tourism, such as buildings, roads and docks. Such construction could cause short-term direct negative environmental impacts through the elimination of vegetation, the movement of earth, changes in drainage patterns, and contamination of air, water, and soil. The subsequent use of infrastructure may generate wastes that contaminate water, soil and air, trash and contamination of water bodies. Motorized vehicles may create water, air and noise contamination and directly kill slow moving animals. Increased movement of people through a protected area could result in the introduction of exotic species and affect the habits and habitats of wild animals. The waves created by fast boats in narrow waterways can cause bank soil erosion and change the natural habits of wildlife. The protected area management plan can itself identify such potential negative direct impacts and specify measures to avoid or mitigate them.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures. Xxxx & Peers will develop draft significance criteria for review and approval by City staff. Using the approved criteria, significant impacts of the project to the roadway, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit systems will be identified for existing, interim and cumulative conditions. Where significant impacts are identified, mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. The residual significance of each impact will also be determined.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures. Each environmental resource section will include a description of the environmental setting (i.e., the baseline environmental conditions), regulatory setting (i.e., federal, state, and local regulations), criteria used to determine the significance of impacts, analysis methodology and assumptions, and detailed discussion of the potential environmental effects of the project. Impact conclusions will be based on substantial evidence, and mitigation measures will be recommended for significant impacts. References will be provided as necessary to the supporting technical studies, which will be included as appendices to the EIR, as necessary. DELIVERABLES: (Sent electronically) • Draft EIR project description in MS Word and PDF EIR Technical Chapters Aesthetics CONTRACTOR will prepare the existing aesthetics setting based on the site visit, photo- documentation, and other existing information. CONTRACTOR will evaluate potential environmental effects on visual and scenic resources from implementation of the proposed project. To accomplish this, the EIR section will identify up to three representative viewpoints on the project site and in adjacent areas (e.g., US Route 101, a County- designated scenic highway) to characterize the existing visual environment, including long- distance views and topography, and existing uses that could be sensitive to changes in the site’s visual character and the project’s compliance with General Plan Policies NCR-8.1 through NCR-8.7 and County Code Section 25.15.062. Existing light and glare in the area will also be discussed. Visual simulations are not anticipated to be required and are not included as part of this scope of work. It is assumed that the applicant’s architect would provide building renderings and visual simulations.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures. The EIR considered a range of potential noise effects including construction noise effects on nearby sensitive receptors, effects of commercial development and other stationary sources on nearby receptors, the effects of noise generated by project traffic increases on receptors adjacent to the affected roadways, and exposure of residences and other sensitive receptors to projected noise from I-5 operations and project-generated traffic on local streets. All of these effects were found to be significant or potentially significant. To address these potentially significant impacts, the EIR identified several mitigation measures. Mitigation Measure 4.6-a, addressing increases in short term construction-generated noise, limits construction activities to day time hours, and requires the use of mufflers and acoustical xxxxxxx during construction. Mitigation Measure 4.6-b, addressing onsite operation generation of noise, requires the consideration of dual-pane windows and sensitive siting of mechanical equipment, among other measures. Mitigation Measure 4.6-c, addressing increases in traffic- related noise, mandates a traffic noise study and the use of sound walls, vegetative screening, and dual-pane windows were necessary. Finally, Mitigation Measure 4.6-d, addressing land use compatibility, requires sound walls, vegetative screening, dual pane windows, and setbacks where needed to minimize exterior noise levels. All of these measures would continue to be applicable to CLSP development. While the EIR proposed that exposure of residences and other sensitive receptors to freeway and other noise be mitigated through noise barrier construction and other improvements, it nonetheless determined that potential effects may not be reduced to a less than significant level in all cases. Therefore, noise effects were identified as potentially significant and unavoidable in the EIR. No mitigation measures are available that would further reduce these effects. There are no airports or airstrips in the vicinity of the project, and the project would not be exposed to noise from these sources. The proposed amendments to the DA will not result in additional new or more severe impacts relating to noise than were previously identified in the EIR. This is because the amendments do not allow development in areas that were previously not analyzed in the EIR, nor do they increase the density, intensity, or location of the development within the CLSP. All the mitigation measures identifi...
