Laserfiche WebLink
AUGUSTIN BERNAL MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL PROJECT DRAFT INITIAL STUDY <br /> population because access to the park is limited to City residents or individuals who obtain a permit <br /> from the City. Thus,the increased usage of the park would not generate a substantial increase in <br /> petroleum consumption.Additionally, energy used from vehicles traveling to and from the project <br /> site would decrease over time as vehicles become increasingly efficient in accordance with the <br /> energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction standards. As such, energy use from project <br /> operations would be less than significant. <br /> b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy <br /> efficiency? <br /> The project would follow applicable energy standards and regulations during the construction <br /> phases. Project operation would not require use of electricity or natural gas, and the increase in <br /> petroleum usage by trail users would not be substantial. All visitor vehicles and , maintenance <br /> equipment would be subject to all applicable regulations that implement state and local plans for <br /> renewable energy and efficiency.As such,the project would result in no impact from conflict with <br /> or obstruction of a state or local plan for renewable energy and energy efficiency. <br /> Mitigation Measures <br /> No mitigation measures are required. <br /> 3.7 Geology and Soils <br /> Less Than <br /> Significant <br /> Potentially Impact With Less Than <br /> Significant Mitigation Significant <br /> Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact <br /> VII.GEOLOGY AND SOILS-Would the project: <br /> a) Directly or indirectly cause potential <br /> substantial adverse effects, including <br /> the risk of loss, injury,or death involving: <br /> i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as <br /> delineated on the most recent Alquist- <br /> Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map <br /> issued by the State Geologist for the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ <br /> area or based on other substantial <br /> evidence of a known fault?Refer to <br /> Division of Mines and Geology Special <br /> Publication 42. <br /> ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ <br /> iii) Seismic-related ground failure, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ <br /> including liquefaction? <br /> iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ <br /> b) Result insubstantial soil erosion or the ❑ ® ❑ ❑ <br /> loss of topsoil? <br /> 12956 <br /> DUDEK 51 April 2022 <br />