MO 2001-061 to 2001-065 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

POTENTIALLY ISSUES POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT LMPACT SOURCES ISSUES NUTIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional X 2 plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? C. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not X 2 limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substarrtially with the movement of an resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory X 2 wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree X 2 reservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other X 2 approved local, regional, or state habitat conservationplan? .:x VLANATION: 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. Project review pursuant to evaluation of biological resources would remain unchanged from existing City policy. 7. MINERALRESOURCES. Would the ro'ect: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the X 2 region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally, important mineral resource recovery site X 2 delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land useplan? 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. Project review pursuant to evaluation of mineral resources would remain unchanged from existing City policy. 8. fIAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the ro'ect: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, X 2 or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the X 2 release of hazardous materials into the environment? 1-30 Zoning Code Amendments - IS/ND 6 January 2001