Laserfiche WebLink
City of San Leandro <br />Housing Element Update (2015-2023) Project <br />Initial Study and Environmental Checklist <br />parks or facilities. Additionally, implementation of the proposed Project does not include nor require the con- <br />struction or expansion of recreational facilities. Further, the housing described is consistent with the General <br />Plan. The General Plan includes proactive measures to respond to increased demand for parkland, including a <br />park dedication ordinance and in -lieu fee. General Plan Policy 21.02 mandates regular systematic mainte- <br />nance of City parks, and Policy 22.05 calls for a commitment to a high level of maintenance in any new park <br />development. General Plan Actions 21.01-B, 21.02-A, and 21.10-A all address ongoing funding for park <br />maintenance and rehabilitation. <br />Future project -level review would include the establishment of additional parks on a project -by -project basis, <br />or the payment of the park impact fee to offset associated impacts. The Housing Element acknowledges the <br />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 signifi- <br />cant changes would occur as a result of Housing Element adoption. For these reasons, implementation of the <br />proposed Project would have less than sign#iicantimpacts on recreation. <br />b) Does their lect include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might <br />have an adverse effect on the environment? <br />See Section XV.a above. <br />Page 144 <br />Less Than <br />Significant <br />XVII. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC <br />Potentially <br />gnifi ant With <br />Significant Mitigation Less Than No <br />Would the project: <br />Impact Incorporated Significant Impact <br />a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establish- <br />ing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the cir- <br />culation system, taking into account all modes of transporta- <br />tion including mass transit and non -motorized travel and rele- <br />❑ ❑ ® ❑ <br />vant components of the circulation system, including but not <br />limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedes- <br />trian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?? <br />b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, <br />including, but not limited to level of service standards and <br />travel demand measures or other standards established by the <br />❑ ❑ ® ❑ <br />county congestion management agency for designated roads <br />or highways? <br />c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an <br />increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in <br />❑ ❑ ❑ <br />substantial safety risks? <br />d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. <br />sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses <br />❑ ❑ ❑ <br />(e.g. farm equipment)? <br />e) Result in inadequate emergency access? <br />❑ ❑ ❑ <br />Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding <br />public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise de- <br />❑ ❑ ❑ El <br />crease the performance or safety of such facilities? <br />Page 144 <br />