My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
5A Public Hearings 2021 0706
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2021
>
Packet 2021 0706
>
5A Public Hearings 2021 0706
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/1/2021 8:02:46 PM
Creation date
7/1/2021 7:50:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Agenda
Document Date (6)
7/6/2021
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
Reso 2021-105 Callan & East 14th Project CUP, Parking and Site Plan
(Approved by)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2021
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
1234
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
May 19, 2021 <br />Page 24 <br /> <br /> <br />5005-004acp <br /> <br /> printed on recycled paper <br />peak hour delay/level of service and traffic queues.”103 Additionally, Mr. Smith <br />found that the exit into Hyde Street for large trucks may constitute a safety issue <br />that was not analyzed or mitigated in the Checklist. This discrepancy and the <br />issues addressed in Mr. Smith’s comments constitute inadequate traffic analysis <br />and must be remedied in an Infill EIR to satisfy CEQA. <br /> <br />Further, Mr. Smith determined that the Project will have significant adverse <br />impacts on traffic and create demands exceeding the capacity of public services and <br />facilities104, these cannot be mitigated by the proposed Uniformly Applicable <br />Development Standards laid out in the General Plan.105 Mr. Smith determined that <br />the Checklist failed to disclose potentially significant cumulative effects that are <br />specific to the Project, that were not analyzed, and are more severe than, the traffic <br />issues raised in the General Plan EIR.106 An Infill EIR must be prepared to <br />adequately address and mitigate impacts from traffic prior to final Project approval <br />by the City Council. <br /> <br />III. THE BOARD LACKED SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO MAKE THE <br />REQUIRED FINDINGS TO APPROVE THE PROJECT UNDER <br />THE ZONING CODE <br /> <br />Under the City’s Zoning Code, in order to approve a CUP, the Board of <br />Zoning Adjustments was required to determine “on the basis of the application, <br />plans, materials, and testimony submitted… [t]hat the proposed location of the use <br />and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be <br />consistent with the General Plan; will not be detrimental to the public health, <br />safety or welfare of persons residing, or working in, or adjacent to, the neighborhood <br />of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the <br />vicinity, or to the general welfare of the City.”107 Further, the Zoning Code requires <br />that the Board may approve a use permit if the Board finds that “That the proposed <br />use will not create adverse impacts on traffic or create demands exceeding the <br />capacity of public services and facilities, which cannot be mitigated.”108 <br /> <br /> <br />103 Smith Comments, p. 4. <br />104 Smith Comments p. 6. <br />105 General Plan Appendix A, p. 6-7. <br />106 Smith Comments p. 6. <br />107 San Leandro Zoning Code § 5.08.124(A)(2). <br />108 Id. at § 5.08.124(A)(4). <br />83
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.