Laserfiche WebLink
XX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- <br />a) Does the project have the potential to <br />substantially degrade the quality of the <br />environment, substantially reduce the <br />habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a <br />fish or wildlife population to drop below <br />self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate <br />a plant or animal community, substantially <br />reduce the number or restrict the range of a <br />rare or endangered plant or animal or <br />eliminate important examples of the major <br />periods of California history or prehistory? <br />b) Does the project have impacts that are <br />individually limited, but cumulatively <br />considerable? ("Cumulatively <br />considerable" means that the incremental <br />effects of a project are considerable when <br />viewed in connection with the effects of <br />past projects, the effects of other current <br />project, and the effects of probable future <br />projects.) <br />c) Does the project have environmental <br />effects which will cause substantial adverse <br />effects on human beings, either directly or <br />indirectly? <br />Less Than <br />Significant <br />Potentially <br />With <br />Less Than <br />Significant <br />Mitigation <br />Significant No <br />Impact <br />Incorporated <br />Impact Impact <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ ❑ <br />❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ <br />❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ <br />Note: Authority cited: Public Resources Code sections 21083, 21083.05, 21083.09. <br />Reference: Gov. Code section 65088.4; Public Resources Code sections 21073, 21074, 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, <br />21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083, 21083.3, 21083.5, 21084.2, 21084.3, 21093, 21094, 21095 and 21151; Sundstrom <br />v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296; Leonoffv. Monterey Board of Supervisors (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d <br />1337; Eureka Cilizensfor Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.AppAth 357; Protect the Historic Amador <br />Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.AppAth 1099, 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown <br />Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.AppAth 656. <br />Initial Study Form Page 15 of 15 FORM "T' <br />75D-213 <br />