SFPUC 2001 Alameda Watershed Management Plan

III. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND IMPACTSI. AESTHETICS• Options presented under Actions sun2a and sun2b would require amendments to existing permitssouth of I-680. The increase in mining depths proposed in both Actions sun2a and sun2b wouldnot be likely to substantially impact aesthetics of these existing quarries because the increasedmining depth would not be visible from public view areas. Although mining has influenced thevisual character of the areas south of I-680, nursery plants are more dominant in many of theviews, and mitigation measures have been required for areas near the public view. Shouldincreasing the mining width under Action sun2a result in increased public views of the miningareas, it may reasonably be assumed that Alameda County would apply conditions of approval tothe permit modifications consistent with those applied to SMP-24 and SMP-30, such as requiringan appropriate landscape plan. Amendment of the existing permits could be subject to projectlevelenvironmental review by Alameda County, which would analyze potential impacts andidentify detailed mitigation measures, if warranted._________________________REFERENCES – AestheticsExcept where indicated, references are on file at the San Francisco Planning Department.EDAW, Inc., prepared for San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, Sunol Valley ResourcesManagement Element, Appendix A-3 of the Alameda Watershed Management Plan, 1998.EDAW, Inc., prepared for San Francisco Water Department, Technical Memorandum No. 4:Visual Resources, Appendix C-5 of the Alameda Watershed Management Plan, 1994.NOP 96.223E: Alameda Watershed Management Plan III.I-13a • ESA / 930385January 2001