Laserfiche WebLink
PC: 6.3-93 <br /> GP-93-3/ZR-93-4 <br /> 2. What existing, reasonable, alternative sites in the vicinity are planned for the use and can <br /> accommodate the proposal? <br /> • This criteria does not apply to this General Plan Amendment, since most of the areas <br /> proposed for change are currently developed. <br /> 3. What is the potential for the proposal to establish an undesirable, growth-inducing precedent? <br /> • No changes in the existing uses are proposed. <br /> 4. What is the effect of the proposal on the fiscal health of the County? <br /> • No effects on the fiscal health of the County attributable to this project have been <br /> identified. <br /> All General Plan designations include density standards,function information,typical types, and locational <br /> criteria. The changes proposed are consistent with these above items. <br /> In addition, Volume I includes an Implementation Measure that establishes the following criteria for use <br /> in the review of reclassifications: <br /> 1. Additional land is needed for urban development. <br /> • The proposal is for areas of existing development and does not provide a significant <br /> amount of land for urban development. <br /> 2. Adequate services can be made available for the development permitted in the zone. <br /> No change in services is proposed for the existing development. <br /> 3. Approval of the proposal will not adversely affect the fiscal health of the County. <br /> • No effects attributable to this project have been identified. <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: <br /> An Initial Study was prepared for this item on April 21, 1993. On the basis of that study, a proposed <br /> on with a'De Minimis <br /> Negative Declaration <br /> ared which states heat the project willon teha have npadve se effect on wildlife resources. <br /> Finding'act <br /> resources. <br /> has been prep <br /> -12- <br />