My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
_DEIR
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2025
>
12-10
>
ITEM 5 EXHIBIT A
>
_DEIR
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/2/2025 3:54:34 PM
Creation date
12/2/2025 3:49:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
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.
/
586
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City of Pleasanton—Hidden Canyon Residences and Preserve <br />Draft EIR Environmental Impact Analysis <br /> <br /> <br />FirstCarbon Solutions 3-3 <br />https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480016/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/21480016 Sec03-00 Env Impact Analysis.docx <br />Code Environmental Issue <br />HAZ Hazards and Hazardous Materials <br />HYD Hydrology and Water Quality <br />LAND Land Use <br />NOI Noise <br />PUB Public Services <br />REC Recreation <br />TRANS Transportation <br />UTIL Utilities and Service Systems <br />WILD Wildfire <br /> <br />Cumulative Effects <br />CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 requires the consideration of cumulative impacts within an EIR when <br />a project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable. According to CEQA, “. . . the <br />incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the <br />effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future <br />projects.” In identifying projects that may contribute to cumulative impacts, CEQA allows the use of a <br />list of past, present, and reasonably anticipated future projects which have the potential to result in <br />related or cumulative impacts, including those which are outside of the control of the lead agency. <br />In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b), “. . . the discussion of cumulative impacts <br />shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, the discussion need not <br />provide as great [a level of] detail as is provided for the effects attributable to the project alone.” The <br />discussion should be guided by standards of practicality and reasonableness, and it should focus on <br />the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects contribute rather than on the attributes <br />of other projects that do not contribute to the cumulative impact. <br />The proposed project’s cumulative impacts were considered in conjunction with other proposed and <br />approved projects in the vicinity of the project site, including the County of Alameda (County) and <br />the City of Pleasanton (City). <br />3.1.1 - Cumulative Project List <br />Although the physical conditions existing when the NOP is published normally are used to establish <br />the baseline for the analysis of cumulative impacts (CEQA Guideline § 15125 (a)(1)), the City has sole <br />discretion to determine which projects to include in a cumulative impact project list. In exercising its <br />discretion, the City is guided by the basic standard that the cumulative list should include projects <br />when it is reasonable, feasible, and practical to do so, given the information available about the <br />projects, and when failure to include such projects would lead to an inadequate analysis of the <br />severity and significance of the cumulative impacts in question. Golden Door Props., LLC v. County of <br />San Diego (2020) 50 CA5th 467, 529. The City also notes that the CEQA Guidelines specify that
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.