My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2015-09-28 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
AgdaPkt 2015-09-28 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2015 10:44:35 AM
Creation date
9/24/2015 7:14:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
9/28/2015
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
210
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
Further, because the Project is consistent with the DTPP for which an EIR was <br />prepared, and there are no significant impacts peculiar to this Project or the subject site, <br />or any other circumstances which require an EIR, no further environmental review <br />is/was required. Accordingly, the City’s environmental review process complies with <br />CEQA, pursuant to sections 15168, 15162, 15163 and 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines. <br /> <br />b. Appellants’ Contentions that the City Must Prepare an EIR Lack Merit. <br /> <br />i. The City is Not Required to Prepare a Tiered EIR. <br /> <br />Appellants’ Contention: The City is required to prepare a “tiered EIR” pursuant to Public <br />Resources Code section 21094 because the DTPP EIR was a “program EIR” and the <br />City must now study significant effects from the subject Project now at issue. (See, e.g., <br />J&S Management Appeal—July 22, 2015 letter, p. 2, and June 10, 2015 letter, pp. 2- <br />11.) <br /> <br />City’s Response: Subdivision (b) of Public Resources Code section 21094 provides: <br />(b) This section applies only to a later project that the lead agency <br />determines is all of the following: <br />(1) Consistent with the program, plan, policy, or ordinance for which <br />an environmental impact report has been prepared and certified. <br />(2) Consistent with applicable local land use plans and zoning of <br />the city, county, or city and county in which the later project would <br />be located. <br />(3) Not subject to Section 21166. <br /> <br />By citing Public Resources Code section 21094, Appellants are conceding that the <br />Project is consistent with the DTPP, for which the EIR was certified in 2011 (the first and <br />second factors of subdivision (b)). In other words, Appellants cannot simultaneously <br />assert a tiered EIR is now required under section 21094 and that the Project conflicts <br />with the DTPP. Thus, by invoking section 21094, Appellants have contradicted their <br />arguments that the Project is inconsistent with the DTPP. <br /> <br />In any event, Public Resources Code section 21094 is inapplicable because, pursuant <br />to subdivision (b)(3) thereof, the Project is subject to Public Resources Code section <br />21166 and its implementing CEQA Guidelines sections. Pursuant to that analysis, <br />another EIR is not required. <br /> <br />7.A. - Page 21
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.