The City's 2019 Scoping Plan for a new EIR

NOP


NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SEIR)

AND PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING FOR THE POINT MOLATE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


DATE: July 12, 2019


TO: Office of Planning & Research State Clearinghouse, County Clerk, and Affected Agencies (via Hand Delivery and Certified Mail) and Adjacent Property Owners and Interested Parties (via US Mail and City website)


FROM: City of Richmond


LEAD AGENCY: City of Richmond

Planning and Building Services Department 450 Civic Center Plaza

P.O. Box 4046

Richmond, CA 94804-1630


CONTACT: Lina Velasco, Director of Planning and Building Services (510) 620-6841

lina_velasco@ci.richmond.ca.us

SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation of a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) in accordance with State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines section 15162 and Notice of Public Scoping Meeting


  1. NOTICE OF PREPARATION

    Notice is hereby given that the City of Richmond (City) will prepare a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for a proposed mixed-use development project (Modified Project) on the former Point Molate Navy Fuel Depot and Winehaven Historic District (Point Molate Site or Project Site). The Modified Project makes certain changes in land use and intensities to the project (Casino Project) and alternatives analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Point Molate Mixed-Use Tribal Destination Resort and Casino Project that was certified by the City in 2011 (2011 FEIR). These changes include, but are not limited to, the elimination of the proposed casino, increasing allowable residential units and rehabilitating the buildings that contribute to the historic Winehaven District (similar to the rehabilitation in Alternative B1). The SEIR will address the potential physical and environmental effects of the Modified Project per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code [PRC] section 21000, et seq., and

    the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations section 15000, et seq.) An SEIR is given the same notice and public review as is an EIR. (CEQA Guideline section 15162(d).)


    As the Lead Agency, the City will use the SEIR when considering approval of the Modified Project. Responsible Agencies, which are public agencies other than the City that have discretionary approval power over the Modified Project, also may rely on the SEIR prepared by the City when issuing approvals for the implementation of the Modified Project. The City has prepared this Notice of Preparation (NOP) to provide Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and other interested parties with a description of the Modified Project and information about potential environmental effects pursuant to State CEQA requirements.


    The 2011 FEIR, this NOP, and the file for the Modified Project are available for review between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday, and between 8:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m., Friday, at the City of Richmond Planning and Building Services Office, Second Floor, 450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804. The 2011 FEIR also is available at the following website: https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/1863/Point-Molate-Resort-and-Casino.


  2. PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT PERIOD

    Further notice is hereby given that the City invites comments on the scope and content of the SEIR in response to this NOP. This NOP will be circulated for a 30-day review period.

    Comments on the scope of the SEIR should focus on the potentially significant environmental effects that the Modified Project may have on the physical environment that should be addressed in the SEIR, ways in which those effects might be minimized and potential alternatives to the Modified Project that should be addressed in the SEIR. To the extent that the public comments previously received on the scope and adequacy of the 2011 FEIR apply to the Modified Project, the City of Richmond will continue to consider such comments during the preparation of the SEIR. In your response, include your name, the name of your agency or organization (if applicable), and contact information.


    Comments on the NOP must be received in writing at the above City of Richmond mailing address to the attention of Lina Velasco, Director of Planning and Building Services, or via e-mail to lina_velasco@ci.richmond.ca.us, by 4:00 p.m. on August 12, 2019. In addition, comments may be provided at the Public Scoping Meeting that is noticed below.


  3. PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING

    Further notice is hereby given that the City has scheduled a Public Scoping Meeting at the time and location indicated below. The purposes of the Public Scoping Meeting are to describe the Modified Project and the environmental review process and to receive verbal input on the appropriate scope of the environmental review. The City will consider all comments, written and oral, in determining the final scope of the evaluation to be included in the SEIR. It is requested that comments at this Public Scoping Meeting follow the guidelines listed above in Section B.


    Public Scoping Meeting: Monday, July 29, 2019, 6:00 p.m.

    City of Richmond Council Chambers 440 Civic Center Plaza Richmond, CA 94804


  4. PROJECT LOCATION

    The Point Molate Site is located on the San Pablo Peninsula within the City, in Contra Costa County (see Figures 1 and 2 attached to this NOP). The Project Site is bounded by the San Francisco Bay to the west, open space parcels to the north and south, and the Chevron Richmond refinery to the east, with Potrero Ridge’s 480-foot hillsides separating these two sites. Approximately 142 acres of the approximately 413-acre Project Site are submerged in the San Francisco Bay, leaving approximately 271 acres above water. The Project Site is approximately 1.5 miles north of Interstate 580 (I-580) and the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, and has direct freeway access through Stenmark Drive, a City-owned roadway.


  5. EXISTING CONDITIONS

    The Point Molate Site currently is within multiple zoning districts, consisting of: Single-family Hillside Residential (RH), Multi-family Residential (RM1), General Commercial (CG), Light Industrial (IL), Parks and Recreation (PR), and Open Space (OS). The Project Site’s General Plan land use classifications are Business/Light Industrial, Medium-Density Residential, Low- Density Residential, Parks and Recreation, and Open Space. The Project Site contains open space and a variety of historical and cultural resources, notably the Winehaven Historic District and the Chinese Shrimp Camp archeological site. Elevations on the Project Site range from below mean sea level (msl) along the western shoreline to approximately 350 feet above msl along the eastern property border. The crest of the Potrero Ridge forms the eastern boundary of the Project Site. The slopes on the Project Site range from relatively flat within the open shoreline areas to approximately 75 percent slope along the steep hillsides of the Potrero Ridge. The Project Site contains a variety of terrestrial and aquatic habitat types. Terrestrial habitat types identified within the Project Site include annual grassland, coastal scrub, mixed riparian, eucalyptus woodland, invasive scrub, landscape plantings, ruderal/developed, and beach strand. Aquatic habitats within the Project Site include seasonal wetland, ephemeral drainage, eel-grass bed, tidal marsh, and navigable waters. The 2011 FEIR provides a detailed description of the conditions and setting of the Project Site at that time; where conditions have changed, the SEIR will contain updated descriptions.


    East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) provides potable water to the Project Site through a 12-inch diameter water main along Stenmark Drive, which was installed in 1997. Water is pumped uphill to a storage tank, Tank A, and distributed onsite through private lines.

    Approximately 63 percent of the pipes are asbestos-concrete pipes, approximately 26 percent are unprotected steel, and approximately 11 percent are cast iron. The system is divided into four independent distribution systems. Two storage tanks, Tank A and Tank 66, provide fire protection and potable water. Tank A has a capacity of 1,134,000 gallons and Tank 66 has a capacity of 200,000 gallons. Tank A has a leak with an estimated loss of 15,000 gallons per day (gpd).

    There are 97 fire hydrants throughout the Project Site. The water supply system on the Project Site is normally kept off, as there has been little demand for potable water since base operations

    ceased; it is maintained in caretaker status for fire suppression purposes.


    The Project Site is within the 13.5-square mile service boundary of the Richmond Municipal Sewer District (RMSD), but is not currently connected to the RMSD’s wastewater collection system.

    RMSD, via an operations contract with Veolia Water North, operates a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), located approximately three miles from the Project Site at 601 Canal Boulevard in Point Richmond. Throughout the Project Site there are 4-, 6-, 8-, 12-, 18-, and 24-inch diameter sewers, which were plugged and capped at the manholes in 1995. There is an industrial wastewater treatment plant and a sanitary sewer treatment plant at Navy Building No. 125 and two septic tanks with leachfields at Navy Buildings No. 87 and No. 75. The wastewater treatment system includes a 10-inch diameter steel outfall to the Bay. The treatment plant had a design capacity of 24,000 gallons per day and a trickling filter capacity of 20,000 gallons per day. Neither the sewer collection system nor treatment plant is in use; portable toilets are currently used on- site. Some sewage from the Project Site is trucked to the RMSD WWTP.


    Surface runoff from lands within the Project Site and lands tributary to the Project Site originates from the ridge located approximately one fourth to one half mile east of the western coastline.

    There are eight distinct watersheds defined by the topography of the Project Site, varying in size from 20.4 acres to 62.5 acres. Each watershed has a separate discharge point to the Bay. The eastern portion of the each watershed is steeper upland where runoff flows over land into a system of natural channels and ravines. Drainage is diverted from the natural overland flows into culverts that discharge into the Bay. Water that falls on impermeable surfaces, such as roads and parking lots, traverses down slope as surface flow into stormwater management systems that discharge into the Bay. The existing storm drain system on the property, installed in the 1940’s and upgraded in 1983, was designed to collect water through drains and inlets in streets and landscaped areas. The system consists of French drains, six concrete catch basins, pipe inlet headwalls, and underground concrete culverts that convey stormwater to eleven outfalls to the Bay.


  6. BACKGROUND

    The Point Molate Site was used primarily for fishing, commercial, and naval activities in the 20th century. From around 1890 to 1912, a Chinese shrimp camp was established at Point Molate where Chinese shrimpers lived and worked. From 1907 to 1919, the historic Winehaven winery occupied the northern portion of the Point Molate Site. Beginning in 1942, the Point Molate Site served as a U.S. Navy fuel storage and transfer facility. This facility closed on September 30, 1995 under the U.S. Department of Defense Base Realignment and Closure Act of 1990. A 45- member Blue Ribbon Advisory Committee developed the Point Molate Reuse Plan (Reuse Plan), which was approved by the Richmond City Council acting as the Local Reuse Authority (LRA), in 1997. The Reuse Plan contemplated a development scenario at the Point Molate Site with 670 residential units and preservation of approximately 70 percent of the land within the Point Molate Site as open space. In addition, the Reuse Plan envisioned that the Winehaven Historic District, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, would be preserved for adaptive reuse.


    A Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Casino Project was released in July 2009 (2009 DEIS/EIR). The 2009 DEIS/EIR fully analyzed five development alternatives for the Point Molate Site, including one that contained substantial commercial and residential components without a casino (e.g., Alternative D). Under CEQA, the level of analysis for alternatives need not be exhaustive. (Sierra Club v. City of Orange (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 523, 547.) Because the City prepared the 2009 DEIS/EIR jointly with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), it addressed all six alternatives to the same level of detail as the proposed Casino Project. (40 C.F.R. § 1502.14.) After the 2009 DEIS/EIR was completed and circulated for public review and comment, the City

    and BIA determined that due to their differing internal procedures and timelines, the environmental review process should be completed separately. For that reason, the City completed the 2011 FEIR under CEQA and independent of the NEPA process. The 2011 FEIR included a full analysis of the five alternatives addressed in the 2009 DEIS/EIR, as well as a sixth alternative added in response to comments, Alternative B1 “Preserve Building 6” Mixed Use Tribal Destination Resort and Casino. In March 2011, the City Council certified the 2011 FEIR for the Point Molate Mixed Use Tribal Destination Resort and Casino. However, after certifying the 2011 FEIR, the Richmond City Council discontinued consideration of the destination resort and casino project.

    The Regional Water Quality Control Board relied on the CEQA analysis in the 2011 FEIR in order to approve a Final Feasibility Study/Remedial Action Plan for remediation for the Project Site in June 2014.


    Following litigation between the City and the Casino Project proponents, the United States District Court entered a Judgment on April 12, 2018, pursuant to a settlement between the parties. The judgment provides that the City, in accordance with CEQA and other applicable law, shall provide certain discretionary City approvals for a project within 24 months from the effective date of the judgment.


    In 2018, the City undertook a comprehensive community visioning process to obtain input from the local community regarding what types of land uses should be considered at the Project Site.


    Because the 2011 FEIR previously evaluated the mix of land uses and intensities on the Project Site and the current applicant Winehaven Legacy LLC (Applicant) is proposing a modified mix, the City was required to determine whether further CEQA environmental review is required for the Modified Project in accordance with PRC Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

    Under these sections, no further environmental review is required unless the Modified Project would have new or substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the certified 2011 FEIR. Because the Modified Project may result in new and substantially more severe impacts than the former alternatives analyzed in the 2011 FEIR, the City is preparing an SEIR for the Modified Project.


  7. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

    The Modified Project proposed by the Applicant consists of the mixed-use development of approximately 80 acres of the approximately 413-acre Point Molate Site (of which approximately 271 acres is above water) that includes a variety of residential and commercial uses, as well as supporting road and utility infrastructure. Approximately 180 acres of the Point Molate Site would remain as open space that is enhanced with the incorporation of natural trails.


    From the completion of entitlement, the Applicant assumes approximately 18 to 24 months to complete design, final engineering, and environmental permitting required to begin construction. Construction of the Modified Project and all infrastructure improvements, onsite and offsite, will be built in a single development phase and are estimated to require 7 to 9 years to complete.


    MODIFIED PROJECT COMPONENTS

    The Modified Project proposes a mixed-use community that would include the following required components: open space, adaptive re-use of the historic cottages, adaptive re-use of the historic Winehaven building, and residential development. The Modified Project includes rehabilitation of the historic buildings, unlike all but one of the Casino Project alternatives studied in the 2011 FEIR, which proposed to demolish the largest historic building, Building 6 and relocate Building

    1. Figure 3 shows the historic buildings that would be rehabilitated by the Modified Project.

      The Modified Project would be divided into eight Planning Areas, which are presented in Table 1 and Figure 4. The Planning Areas shown in Figure 4 depict the approximate outer limits of where development could occur, and may ultimately include some open space within those areas. The Modified Project proposes the following:


      • Approximately 1,500 residential units1;

      • Rehabilitating approximately 374,572 square feet of existing historic buildings, with approximately 20,000 square feet used for retail and restaurants, and the remainder as flexible use space for commercial and/or residential uses;

      • Approximately 250,000 square feet of new construction within Planning Areas F - H, with approximately 20,000 square feet used for retail or restaurant uses , and the remainder as flexible use space for commercial and/or residential uses;

      • Approximately 180 acres of open space, including recreational areas and trails open to the public;

      • Construction of approximately 1.5 miles of the Bay Trail along the shoreline, including a vista overlook;

      • A terminal on the existing pier that may be accessible to ferries, shuttles, and/or water taxis; and

      • Removal of buried storage tanks that are currently located within the Planning Areas.


        TABLE 1

        MODIFIED PROJECT PLANNING AREAS

        Planning Areas

        Modified Project1

        A–E

        1,200 dwelling units

        F–H

        Mix of commercial and residential uses, organized as follows:

        Notes:

        1 Number of dwelling units and square feet are approximate

        2 Square footage of the existing historic buildings is approximate and derived from prior documentation and plans. Surveys will be conducted to verify existing square footage.

        • 374,572 square feet of rehabilitated existing structures2

          • Up to 20,000 square feet of retail and restaurants

          • Remainder 354,572 square feet of commercial or up to 473 dwelling units or a mix of those two uses

        • 250,000 square feet of new construction

          • Up to 20,000 square feet of retail and restaurants

          • Remainder 230,000 square feet of commercial or up to 307 dwelling units or a mix of those two uses

        • 300 dwelling units


        Planning Areas A, B, C, and D would be developed with approximately 670 medium-density residential units (between 10 and 40 units per acre) and E would be developed with approximately 530 high-density residential units (between 25 and 75 units per acre).


        The hillside land in the northeastern portion of the Project Site would be maintained as open space. Open space areas would be maintained primarily in their natural state but could include pedestrian trails, picnic areas, restroom facilities, and park amenities consistent with those found in regional parks in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. The restroom facilities would be


        image

        1 In addition to these 1,500 units, the Modified Project may include up to 780 units in Areas F-H in flexible use space for commercial and/or residential uses described in Table 1. Thus, the Modified Project may include a total of up to 2,280 units with 40,000 square feet of retail and restaurant uses.

        designed to blend in with the natural environment.


        A shoreline park would provide public access to the Bay along the entire shoreline of the Project Site. The shoreline park could include large vegetated areas for walking and enjoying the shoreline, vista overlook, public art and cultural exhibits, picnic areas (both open and reserved), park recreation facilities (play areas, equipment rental, etc.), a paddle sport launch, and restrooms facilities. Additionally, the shoreline park would include the development of an approximately 1.5- mile segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail pursuant to the Bay Trail Plan design policies and guidelines. The proposed alignment of the Bay Trail is shown on Figure 4.


        WATER SUPPLY

        Although existing infrastructure would be preserved to the extent feasible, the majority of on-site mains and service laterals within the Project Site would need to be relocated or removed to accommodate the proposed redevelopment. The Modified Project would install new service connections for the proposed redevelopment from the existing/proposed potable water mains in Stenmark Drive owned and operated by EBMUD within the public right-of-way.


        WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT

        Although existing infrastructure would be preserved to the extent feasible, the majority of on-site mains and service laterals within the Project Site would need to be relocated or removed to accommodate the proposed redevelopment. The Modified Project would install new service connections for the proposed redevelopment from the proposed sanitary sewer main in the portion of Stenmark Drive within the Project Site. Two possible options for wastewater treatment are being considered for analysis in the SEIR under the Modified Project:


        Proposed Wastewater Treatment Option A –Install a new sanitary sewer treatment facility, which would operate as a standalone treatment system for the Modified Project’s sanitary sewer needs.


        Proposed Wastewater Treatment Option B –Install a new force main along a proposed segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail (see Utility Corridor – Option 1 on Figure 2) or Stenmark Drive (see Utility Corridor – Option 2 on Figure 2) and Western Drive to bring sanitary sewer service to the Project Site from an existing 12-inch sanitary sewer line at the intersection of Tewksbury Avenue and Contra Costa Street in Point Richmond. A new sanitary sewer lift station may be required on Marine Street near the connection point to the existing system.


        STORMWATER

        The Modified Project would include removal or abandonment of most of the existing drainage system and installation of a new storm drainage system, while retaining the downstream 11 outfalls to the Bay. The Modified Project would be required to comply with Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) in order to reduce post-construction stormwater pollutants. In order to comply with Provision C.3, the proposed redevelopment could implement Low Impact Development (LID) treatment facilities including, but not limited to, bioretention areas, pervious pavements, and infiltration trenches. The LID facilities would intercept stormwater for treatment prior to discharging into the existing outfalls.


        OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS

        Off-site infrastructure improvements may be necessary to implement the Modified Project and may require additional entitlements not listed below. Off-site infrastructure improvements may include, but are not limited to the following:

        • Widening of Stenmark Drive from easterly project boundary to connection at freeway (I- 580).

        • Undergrounding or relocating existing utility power poles along Stenmark drive from the easterly boundary to freeway connection (I-580) to accommodate completion of anticipated improvements to Stenmark Drive.

        • Under Proposed Wastewater Treatment Option B, installation of a new force main along a proposed segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail (see Utility Corridor – Option 1 on Figure 2) or Stenmark Drive (see Utility Corridor – Option 2 on Figure 2) and Western Drive to bring sanitary sewer service to the Project Site from an existing 12-inch sanitary sewer line at the intersection of Tewksbury Avenue and Contra Costa Street in Point Richmond.


  8. COMPARISON TO ALTERNATIVES B1 AND D

    The 2011 FEIR for the Casino Project studied the environmental impacts of a large casino-hotel complex, as well as several alternatives, including the Non-Trust Acquisition with Non-Gaming Mixed-Use Development Alternative (Alternative D) and the “Preserve Building 6” Mixed Use Tribal Destination Resort and Casino with Residential Component (Alternative B1). The overall land uses and development plan characteristics of the Modified Project are similar to the scope of Alternative D, but like Alternative B1, the Modified Project proposes to rehabilitate all of the contributors to the historic Winehaven District. A comparison of the Modified Project and Alternative D is in Table 2. A comparison of the Modified Project and Alternative B1 is presented in Table 3.


    TABLE 2

    COMPARISON OF THE MODIFIED PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVE D

    Use

    Alternative D1

    Modified Project1

    Outside the Historic District

    Residential

    1,100 dwelling units

    1,200 dwelling units2

    Open Space

    180 acres

    180 acres

    Water Transportation Terminal

    5,000 square feet

    5,000 square feet

    In the Historic District

    Existing Buildings

    Uses in Rehabilitated Winehaven Buildings

    163,500 square feet3, 4

    (all commercial, no residential)

    374,572 square feet3 (commercial and/or residential)

    New Construction

    Commercial or Mixed-Use

    250,000 square feet (hotel and conference center)

    250,000 square feet (commercial or mixed-use commercial/residential)

    Residential

    0

    300

    Notes:

    1 Number of dwelling units, square feet, and acres are approximate

    2 These units could be in Planning Areas A–E. Portions of Planning Areas C and D are within the existing boundaries of the Winehaven Historic District.

    3 Alternative D would demolish 211,072 square feet of historic buildings, accounting for the difference between Alternative D and the Modified Project.

    4 Does not include basement square footage, which for the Modified Project would be surveyed and is estimated to be approximately 16,000 square feet.

    TABLE 3

    COMPARISON OF THE MODIFIED PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVE B1

    Use

    Alternative B11

    Modified Project1

    Outside the Historic District

    Residential

    340 dwelling units

    1,200 dwelling units2

    Open Space

    180 acres

    180 acres

    Water Transportation Terminal

    5,000 square feet

    5,000 square feet

    In the Historic District

    Existing Buildings

    Uses in Rehabilitated Winehaven Buildings

    374,572 square feet3

    (all commercial, no residential)

    374,572 square feet3 (commercial and/or residential)

    New Construction

    Commercial or Mixed-Use

    960,528 square feet (hotel, casino, tribal facilities, entertainment)

    250,000 square feet (commercial or mixed-use commercial/residential)

    Residential

    0

    300

    Notes:

    1 Number of dwelling units, square feet, and acres are approximate

    2 These units could be in Planning Areas A–E. Portions of Planning Areas C and D are within the existing boundaries of the Winehaven Historic District.

    3 Does not include basement square footage, which for the Modified Project would be surveyed and is estimated to be approximately 16,000 square feet


  9. REQUIRED DISCRETIONARY CITY APPROVALS

    Approvals required from the City of Richmond for the Modified Project may include, but are not limited to:

    • General Plan Amendment

    • Rezoning to Planned Area District

    • Planned Area Plan

    • Design Review

    • Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map

    • Certification of the SEIR


  10. OTHER AGENCY REVIEW AND APPROVALS

    Other federal, state, or regional agencies that may require review of or permits for the Modified Project include, but are not limited to:

    • San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission

    • California Regional Water Quality Control Board – San Francisco Bay Region

    • California State Historic Preservation Office

    • California Department of Fish and Wildlife

    • California Department of Transportation

    • California Department of Toxic Substances Control

    • California State Lands Commission

    • California Toll Bridge Authority

    • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

    • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

    • U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service (also known as NOAA Fisheries)

    • U.S. Coast Guard

  11. PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

    Given that Modified Project is most similar to Alternative D of the alternatives and Casino Project studied in the 2011 FEIR, the environmental impacts of the Modified Project likely would be similar to Alternative D. Ultimately, the SEIR will determine whether the Modified Project would involve new or substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the certified 2011 FEIR, or would result in impacts for topics not previously analyzed. Based on existing information and the analysis completed for the 2011 FEIR, most impacts identified for Alternative D were determined to be less than significant or could be reduced to a less-than-significant level with mitigation. The 2011 FEIR found that Alternative D would have significant and unavoidable impacts associated with: demolition of Building 6 of the Winehaven Historic District (to be preserved and reused under the Modified Project); addition of new visual elements within the Winehaven Historic District; and transportation facilities in the cumulative year. The following topics will be addressed in the SEIR:


    Aesthetics

    Air Quality and Global Climate Change

    Biological Resources

    Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources

    Energy

    Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources

    Hazards, Wildfire, and Hazardous Materials

    Hydrology and Water Quality

    Land Use and Planning and Recreation

    Noise

    Population and Housing

    Public Services and Utilities

    Transportation



    The SEIR will also examine a reasonable range of alternatives to the Modified Project, including the CEQA-mandated No Project Alternative and other potential alternatives that may reduce or avoid significant environmental effects.


  12. ATTACHED FIGURES


    • Figure 1: Regional Location

    • Figure 2: Site and Vicinity

    • Figure 3: Historic Winehaven Buildings to be Preserved and Rehabilitated

    • Figure 4: Conceptual Modified Project Planning Areas

Pin It on Pinterest