MO 2001-061 to 2001-065 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

POTENTIALLY ISSUES POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT EVIPACT SOURCES ISSUES MITIGATION DdPACT INCORPORATED 1. LAND US AND PLANNING. Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? X 2 b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local X 2 coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community X 2 conservationplan? EXPLANATION: Subsequent to the current General Plan and Zoning Code, several policy documents (i.e., the West San Leandro — MacArthur Boulevard Redevelopment Plan) have been adopted. Land use regulations are being refined to reflect these other documents, which are generally consistent with the existing General Plan and Zoning Code. The proposed amendments to the Zoning Code, which are outlined in Appendix A -Project Description, would result in increased discretionary review of certain land uses, with the primary objective of reducing potential land use conflicts (e.g., industrial uses next to residential uses). This is a beneficial aspect of the proposal. 2. POPULATION A -ND HOUSING. Would the project:' a. Induce substantial population growth in an area either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g. through X 2 projects in an undeveloped area or major infrastructure)? ,,. Displace substantial number of existing housing, necessitating the construction of X 2 replacement housing elsewhere? C. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement X 2 housing elsewhere? EXPLANATION: Development potential would either be equal to, reduced from, and/or subject to additional discretionary review when compared to existing regulations, as outlined in Attachment A -Project Description to this report. 3. GEOLOGY ANDI:SOILS. Would theproject::...' ..:: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk X 2 of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the X 2 State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii Strong seismic ground shaking? X 2 iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including X 2 liquefaction? iv) Landslides? X 2 b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X 2 topsoil? Zoning Code Amendments - IS/ND 3 January 2001