Laserfiche WebLink
3.13 Aesthetic Impacts (Obstruction of¥iews, Design, Etc., Cont.): <br /> <br /> X <br /> May be Insignificant Insignificant <br /> Si nilicant if Mitigated <br /> <br />3.14 Impacts to Archaeological and/or Historical Sites: <br /> <br /> The subject property is an undeveloped site located near the southeast edge of the City of <br /> Pleasanton. Based upon an archival and on-site reconnaissance conducted by Miley Paul <br /> Holman of Holman & Associates, dated October 3, 1991, and made part of the Kottinger <br /> Hills Project Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) dated July, 1992, it was deter- <br /> mined that no known archaeological and/or historical sites were known to be present on <br /> the site and that there was a very low possibility of sub-surface archaeological/historical <br /> resources on the site too. <br /> <br /> If archeological/historical materials are uncovered during grading, trenching, or other on- <br /> site excavation, all work on the site shall be stopped and the City of Pleasanton shall be <br /> immediately notified. The county coroner and the Native American Heritage Commis- <br /> sion shall also be notified and procedures shall be identified and followed as required in <br /> Appendix "K" of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This requirement <br /> would be added to any ordinances/resolutions covering the development of this property. <br /> A similar note shall be required to appear on the final grading plans, improvement plans, <br /> and tract development plans. <br /> <br /> X <br /> May be Insignificant Insignificant <br /> Significant if Mitigated <br /> <br />3.15 Public Controversy Yes No <br /> Is there any serious public controversy concerning the environmental el- X <br /> feets of the proposed project? If so, list below. <br /> The previous development proposal for the Lin property generated signifi- <br /> cant concerns from surrounding property owners, including density, loss o5 <br /> existing trees, loss of open space, traffic and circulation, impacts to their <br /> quality of life, etc., as seen by the referendum overturning that project. <br /> There already appears to be neighborhood concern towards this develop- <br /> ment proposal, reflected in verbal and e-mail communication from neigh- <br /> bors. <br /> <br />PUD-33, Initial Study Page 10 of l ] December 4, 2003 <br /> <br /> <br />