Laserfiche WebLink
g) The Housing Element would be fully compliant with federal, state, and local statues/ regulations related to solid waste. <br />These regulations were analyzed during the Update process and were not identified as a housing production constraint. <br />h) The Housing Element would be fully compliant with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to <br />stormwater discharge. These regulations were analyzed during the Housing Element process and were not identified as <br />a constraint to housing production. <br /> POTENTIALLY <br /> POTENTL~LLY SIGNIFICANT LES5 THAN <br />ISSUES SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT IMP~CT 50LiRCES <br /> ISSUES MITIGATION IMPACT <br /> INCORPORATED <br />13. RECREATION <br />a. Would the project increase the use of existing X 1, 2 <br />neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational <br />facilities such that substantial physical deterioration <br />of the facility would occur or be accelerated? <br />b. Does the project include recreational facilities or X 1, 2 <br />require the construction or expansion of recreational <br />facilities which might have an adverse physical effect <br />on the environment? <br />EXPLANATION: <br />a) The Housing Element by itself would not increase the use of neighborhood or regional parks, or lead to the deterioration <br />of these facilities through overuse. However, residential development consistent with the Element's policies would <br />result in additional park users in San Leandro. The growth anticipated by the Housing Element has already been <br />accounted for and analyzed in the EIRs for the General Plan and TOD Strategy. The Element would not increase <br />housing development beyond the forecasts included in those document, and would not increase impacts on park facilities <br />or recreational services beyond those already evaluated. The General Plan includes proactive measures to respond to <br />increased demand for parkland, including a park dedication ordinance and in-lieu fee. General Plan Policy 21.02 <br />mandates regular systematic maintenance of City parks, and Policy 22.05 calls for a commitment to a high level of <br />maintenance in any new park development. General Plan Actions 21.01-B, 21.02-A, and 2 L 10-A all address ongoing <br />funding for park maintenance and rehabilitation. <br />Future residential projects would be subject to environmental review. This would include the establishment of additional <br />parks on aproject-by-project basis, or the payment of the park impact fee to offset associated impacts. The Housing Element <br />acknowledges the park impact fee as a potential development constraint (due to its high cost) and indicates that the City should <br />consider reductions in certain circumstances (i.e., senior housing). This is already City policy, and no significant changes <br />would occur as a result of Housing Element adoption. <br />b) The Housing Element is a policy document addressing housing affordability and does not propose recreational facilities <br />or the expansion of recreational facilities. <br />14. AESTHETICS. Would the project: <br />a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X 1, 2, 5 <br />b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but X 1, 2, 3 <br />not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic <br />buildin s within a state scenic hi hway? <br />c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X 1, 2 <br />quality of the site and its surroundin s? <br />d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare X 1, 2 <br />which would adversely affect day or nighttime views <br />in the area? <br />e. Create significant shadow effects on adjacent X 1, 2, 4, 12 <br />buildm s? <br />Housing Element Initial Study and Negative Declaration 24 February 2010 <br />