Laserfiche WebLink
Facts in Support of Finding: Implementation of the Project would not expose people or structures to a <br />significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a dam. As shown in <br />the General Plan Public Safety Element, Exhibit 4, the Project site is not located within the dam inundation <br />area. Moreover, the site is located 130-feet up -gradient from Santiago Creek, which is generally dry, <br />unless conveying storm flows. <br />For the reasons discussed above and the reasons discussed in the DEIR and the Initial Study, impacts <br />associated with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (Initial Study, p. <br />43.) This conclusion also applies, for the same reasons, to the Modified Project. <br />9.9.10 Inundation by Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow <br />Threshold: Would the Project have significant effects relating to inundation by seiche, tsunami, <br />or mudflow? <br />Finding: No impact. (DEIR, p. 2-7; Initial Study, p. 43.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: A seicheā€”a surface wave created when a body of water is shaken by <br />earthquake activity is not likely to impact the Project area. The Geotechnical Engineering Investigation <br />prepared for the Project site provides that no bodies of water are close enough to the Project site to result <br />in a sieche impact. Therefore, no seiche impacts would occur. (Initial Study, p. 43.) <br />A tsunami is not likely to impact the Project area since the Project area is approximately 11.5 miles from <br />the Pacific Ocean, outside of the Tsunami Hazard Zone identified by the California Emergency <br />Management Agency. Therefore, impacts related to tsunamis would not occur. (Initial Study, p. 43.) <br />A mudflow is a landslide composed of saturated rock debris and soil with a consistency of wet cement. <br />The Project area is flat and not near any hillsides that could be susceptible to mudflow. Thus, no mudflow <br />impacts would occur. (Initial Study, p. 43.) <br />For the reasons discussed above and the reasons discussed in the DEIR and the Initial Study, impacts <br />associated with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (Initial Study, p. <br />43.) This conclusion also applies, for the same reasons, to the Modified Project. <br />9.10 Land Use and Planning <br />9.10.1 Divide a Community <br />Threshold: Would the Project physically divide an established community? <br />Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, p. 2-6; Initial Study, p. 44.) <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is developed with a vacant two-story office building that <br />was used by the Wells Fargo bank. The site is adjacent to the south and the east by a single-family <br />residential community, the north by a park, and by a museum and motel to the west across N. Main Street. <br />Implementation of the proposed Project would change the site from an office building to multi -family <br />residential uses, which would extend the residential uses in the community. The existing residential <br />community would not be physically divided by the Project. Rather, the Project would be located at the <br />Resolution No. Page 42 of 76 <br />Certification of the Magnolia at the Park EIR <br />