PC-2026-15 - Laserfiche WebLink

ARROYO LAGO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ADDENDUM FCS 63 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480036/Addendum/21480036 Arroyo Lago Residential Project Addendum.docx Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion There are no officially designated State Scenic Highways or City scenic roadways in or adjacent to the project site. As discussed in the Prior FEIR, the nearest officially designated State Scenic Highway is I-680, located approximately 3 miles west of the project site. The nearest highway eligible for State Scenic Highway designation is I-580, located approximately 1.4 miles north of the project site. Given the distance of the project site to these resources and the intervening development, the proposed project would not be visible from either highway. Given the absence of scenic highways proximate to the project site, the lack of designated scenic resources (i.e., ridgelines, hillsides, rock outcroppings) on the project site, and the presence of intervening development between the project site and the nearest scenic highways, the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources in a State Scenic Highway. Thus, consistent with the Prior FEIR’s conclusions, there would be less than significant impacts in this regard. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new significant impacts or create substantially more severe significant impacts than those previously identified in the Prior FEIR. No additional analysis is required. c) Visual Character Would the project: In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? Prior FEIR Conclusions The Prior FEIR determined that the project site is currently vacant and surrounded by residential, industrial, and public facility uses. Because the County does not have quantitative thresholds for the evaluation of aesthetics, the Prior FEIR addressed both consistency with zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality, as well as changes to the existing visual character and quality. The County Project would introduce new residential development consistent with the ECAP’s MDR designation. The County Project would include single-family homes, junior ADUs, internal streets, and landscaped open space. The Prior FEIR found that the design, materials, and color palette of the homes would be compatible with surrounding development. The County Project would also include a retaining wall and an approximately 8-foot “good neighbor” fence along the western boundary to address grade differences and provide privacy. While the County Project would alter the visual character of the project site, these changes would be consistent with the planned land use and would not degrade the visual quality of the area. Therefore, the Prior FEIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with respect to the County Project and Alternative 2. (Draft EIR, pp. 3.1-17, 6-11). Proposed Project Analysis and Conclusion Although the project site is located in an urbanized area, for which this checklist question limits the analysis to conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality, this analysis of operational impacts addresses both consistency with zoning and other regulations governing