Laserfiche WebLink
b) The project would change the General Plan land use designation on several sites adjacent to San Leandro Creek. However, <br /> the sites are already planned and zoned for the proposed designations, since adoption of the TOD Strategy and subsequent <br /> rezoning in 2007 changed the allowable uses and intensities. Potential impacts on San Leandro Creek were previously <br /> analyzed by the TOD Strategy EIR in 2007. No further impacts would result from the consistency amendments. <br /> c) The potential for wetland impacts was previously evaluated by the 2002 General Plan EIR and the TOD Strategy EIR. <br /> Amendment of the General Plan to achieve consistency with the TOD Strategy and recent Housing Element would have no <br /> impact on wetlands; no removal, filling, or hydrologic interruption is proposed. <br /> d) Amending the General Plan to be consistent with the previously approved TOD Strategy and previously adopted Housing <br /> Element will not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or wildlife <br /> corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. The TOD area is already urbanized areas and the potential for <br /> impacts was previously evaluated in the 2007 EIR. <br /> e) Amendment of the General Plan to achieve consistency with the previously adopted TOD Strategy and Housing <br /> Element will not result in conflicts with any local tree protection ordinances. As noted in the Housing Element Initial <br /> Study, the amendment will likely result in a net increase in tree cover, as the properties proposed for development are <br /> typically vacant sites with minimal vegetation. or underutilized commercial properties that are largely impervious. <br /> There are no conflicts with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources associated with the project. <br /> f) The consistency amendments do not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. <br /> There are no areas covered by such plans in the vicinity of the TOD area. <br /> POTENTIA ELI' <br /> POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN <br /> NO <br /> ISSUES SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT IMPACT SOURCES <br /> ISSUES MITIGATION IMPACT <br /> INCORPORATED <br /> c,al -I.w 3. 4..;I -uP6 .:-_w,a rr - i;IV ^ er2� 4 % r 4TJf; R3."Ig vtr r! ..3 •,S:BL • f g ." 6Tht ya <br /> 7m 11NERALPRESOURCES4 Would 'the , profec t en r -ist fi # , . ,".4 ". ' ; }, as k <br /> a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X 1,2 <br /> resource that would be of value to the region and the <br /> residents of the state? <br /> b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally, important X 1,2,3 <br /> mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local <br /> general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? <br /> EXPLANATION: <br /> a - Neither the State Geologist nor the State Mining and Geology Board has classified any areas in San Leandro as <br /> containing mineral deposits which are of statewide significance or a level of significance which requires further <br /> evaluation. The 2002 General Plan EIR and the 2007 TOD Strategy EIR confirmed that there are no mineral <br /> deposits of significance in the city limits. The proposed consistency amendments would not change this <br /> condition. Thus, no impacts to mineral resources would result from this action. <br /> TOD and Housing Element Genera! Plan Consistency Amendments January 2011 • Page 15 <br />