Laserfiche WebLink
4.7 GEOLOGYAND SOILS <br />According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines a project -would normally have a significant effect on d-le <br />A- .7 gm <br />environment if the project would: <br />GEC-1 Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, 111cludifig the risk of loss, <br />injury, or death involving: <br />i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-PI-Iolo <br />Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on <br />other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology <br />Special Publication 42? <br />ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? <br />iii. Seismic -related ground failure including liquefaction? <br />iv. Landslides <br />GEC-2 Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? <br />GEC -3 Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result <br />of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, <br />liquefaction or collapse? <br />GEO-4 Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), <br />creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? <br />GEC-5 Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste <br />water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? <br />GEC -6 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site of unique geologic <br />feature? <br />Summary of Impacts in the GP EIR <br />As discussed in Section 5.6. Geology and Soils, the city's location and underlying geology make it likely to <br />experience seismic hazards, including strong seismic ground shaking, and secondary hazards, like liquefaction. <br />No active surface faults exist within the plan area. The city is subject to seismic ground shaking; however, future <br />developments adherence to California Building Code and implementation of RR G-1 would reduce impacts to <br />less than significant. Similarly, impacts from seismic -related ground failure which include liquefaction, lateral <br />spreading, seismically induced landslides, and ground lurching -would also be reduced to less than significant <br />with adherence to the California Building Code (CBC), RR G-1, RR GH-2, and GP policies. <br />Future development would comply with existing regulations, which includes preparation and submittal of a <br />Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and a soil engineering evaluation and would reduce impacts to a less than <br />significant level regarding soil erosion (GP EIR p 5.6-21). The city contains alluvial materials that have the <br />potential for expansive soils and settlement and collapse of soils throughout the city, posing a hazard to <br />Ordinance NS-3072 <br />