Laserfiche WebLink
City of Pleasanton—Hidden Canyon Residences and Preserve Project <br />Errata Final EIR <br /> <br /> <br />5-18 FirstCarbon Solutions <br />https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480016/EIR/4 - Final EIR/21480016 Sec05-00 Errata.docx <br />6.4.1–Impact Analysis <br />6-13 <br />Cumulative impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Impacts related to aesthetics, <br />light, and glare for the proposed project would be less than significant with implementation of MM <br />AES-4a. <br />6.5.1–Impact Analysis <br />6-25 <br />Cumulative impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. Impacts related to aesthetics, <br />light, and glare for the proposed project would be less than significant with implementation of MM <br />AES-4a. <br />6.5.1–Impact Analysis <br />6-26 <br />As such, this alternative would still require MM AES-4a to ensure that the appropriate design review <br />is conducted to ensure implementation of best practices to mitigate the potential for adverse light <br />and glare. With implementation of MM AES-4a, Alternative 3 would have less than significant <br />impacts related to the addition of light and glare. <br />6.5.1–Impact Analysis <br />6-30 <br />As such, this alternative would still require implementation of MM GEO-26a through GEO-26d from <br />the proposed project to mitigate any potential impacts related to cultural resources. Overall, while <br />impacts related to proximity to faults, landslides, and liquefaction would be reduced compared to <br />the proposed project, there is still the potential for impacts related to subsidence and earthquakes. <br />With the implementation of MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-26a through GEO-26d, this alternative would <br />have less than significant impact related to geology, soils, and seismicity.