My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2010-06-07 clds, jnt
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
AgdaPkt 2010-06-07 clds, jnt
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2010 4:43:56 PM
Creation date
6/3/2010 3:07:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
6/7/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
145
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />7A <br />Page 36 <br /> <br />b) Does the project include recreational facHities or require the <br />construction or expansion of recreational facilities which <br />might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />D' <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />There are a number of C~y parks within the vicinity of the R-2 zoning districts, including Palm Park on <br />Hudson Street, Fleishman Park on Locust Street, Hawes Park on Roosevelt Avenue, Linden Park on <br />Linden Street Andrew Spinas Park on Bay Road, and Red Morton Community Park on Roosevelt <br />Avenue. The potential for a limited number of additional residences within the vicinity of the parks <br />could slightly increase their usage; however) this potential increase does not exceed the maximum <br />development that the City anticipates pursuant to its existing interpretation of the R-2 density limits, <br />would be considered insignificant, and would not result in the substantial physical deterioration of these <br />parks nor require the construction of parklands. In addition, residential development would be required <br />to pay park in-lieu fees at the time of building permit issuance; these fees are required to fund <br />additional park amenities. <br /> <br />In addition, the project would not conflict with any of the goals and policies in the Open Space element <br />of the General Plan, and private open space would still be required for each lot per the requirements of <br />Article 32 of the Zoning Ordinance. <br /> <br />XV. TRANSPORTAT10NITRAFFIC- <br />Would the project: <br /> <br />II............ <br />. . <br /> <br />Less Than <br />Significant <br />With Mitigation <br />Incorporated <br /> <br />II. -I". <br />. . '. <br /> <br /> <br />b) Exceed, either individually or cumulative.ly, a level of service <br />standard established by the county congestion management <br />agency for designated roads or highways? <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br /> <br />d) Substantially in"crease hazards due to a design feature (e.g., <br />sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible <br />uses (e.g., farm equipment)? <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br /> <br />~ Result in inadequate parking capacity? <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />301 <br /> <br />City of Redwood City) Planning, Housing and Economic Development Department <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.