RES 06035 - Laserfiche WebLink

Draft Environmental Impact Report Bernal Property Phase II Specific Plan 3. Key Project Characteristics, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures a. Key Project Characteristics The Phase II Specific Plan area would be devoted to recreational, institutional, public, and open space uses as described in the Specific Plan (see Chapter 2 and the use descriptions in Appendix B of this EIR), Portions of the property would be graded and/or excavated to prepare for the development of specific uses, Other portions of the site may be excluded from grading, and may be used in a manner for which disturbance of surface/subsurface soils would not be needed at all or would be minimal. b. Significance Criteria Significance criteria for the proposed project's impacts on cultural resources are based on criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines (Appendix G (Items V (b), (c), and (d) (Item (a) is not applicable in the absence of historical resources at the Phase II site) and Item XVII (a) is not applicable because the project does not eliminate any examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory, Impacts on cultural resources would be significant: (1) [If the project would] cause a significant adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines ~15064,S, (2) [If the project would] directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature, (3) [If the project would] disturb any human remains, including those interred outside offormal cemeteries, (4) [If the project would] eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory; Development of lands included in the Bernal Property Phase I Specific Plan area was found to have a potentially adverse impact on cultural resources through grading, excavation, and/or construction activities, To minimize the risk of adverse impacts on cultural resources, the Phase I Planned Unit Development (PUD) was conditioned to require: . Completion of a cultural resources survey of the project site prior to the issuance of a grading permit for either the Western Area or the Central Area (Condition 41); Implementation of mitigation for sites that might be discovered during future survey or monitoring activities (Condition 42); Inclusion in the PUD of all feasible mitigation measures specified in the 1997/2000 EIR, including provisions for the protection of cultural resources, which may include "capping" (which would leave the site undisturbed; see text after Measure E2); and Presence of a qualified archaeologist onsite during grading and site preparation acti- vities, and discontinuance of land-disturbing activities within a 3s-foot radius if cul- . . . 70