Reso 2024-171 Shoreline Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8643

Home

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-171 6 Development Department at San Leandro City Hall located at 835 East 14th Street; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the proposed Single-Family Vesting Tentative Tract Map on October 3, 2024, and adopted a resolution recommending that City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8643; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 2024, the City Council adopted a resolution making the following findings: 1. Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council finds, on the basis of substantial evidence set forth in the record, including but not limited to, the EIR, the First Addendum, the Second Addendum, the Third Addendum and all related information presented to the City Council, that the environmental effects of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8643 and Shoreline Project were sufficiently analyzed. The City Council further finds that none of the circumstances described in the CEQA Guidelines requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR exist because the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 8643: • Will not result in substantial changes in the Shoreline Project which will require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and • Will not result in substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Shoreline Project is undertaken that would require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and • Does not present new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified showing any of the following: a. That the proposed Shoreline Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; b. That significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; c. That mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects, but the project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; and d. That mitigation measures or alternatives considerably different from those analyzed in the EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. 2. Having considered the Third Addendum, the Second Addendum, the administrative record, the EIR, the First Addendum and all written and oral evidence presented to the City Council,