AgdaPkt 2000-11-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

g,~ Interim Urgency Ordinance ("Ordinance") on the project. Related to this claim is the further contention that providing housing on the Project site was not appropriately considered. 2. That there will be a substantial parking shortfall, as there will be an overlap between theater patrons and restaurant and retail patrons. 3. That the cumulative traffic impacts of several "clogged traffic arteries" will have a direct, adverse impact on "the entire local traffic network, as well as emergency response implications," and that the FEIR does not adequately analyze the cumulative impact of multiple-clogged arteries. Following are staff's responses to the three issues raised in the appeal: Interim Urgency Ordinance/Housing Issues The appellant claims that the FEIR improperly failed to analyze the impact of the City's recently enacted Interim Urgency Ordinance ("Ordinance") on the project. The findings set forth in the Ordinance state that large-scale office development proposals would create structures disproportionate to, and in conflict with the appearance of, existing structures adjacent to or in the vicinity thereof, and that such office development proposals would use land resources which could otherwise be developed for housing, commercial and other uses compatible with, and supportive of existing uses, including residential uses. The City Council further finds, in the Ordinance, that the unavailability of housing in the City is critical and this shortage could be exacerbated if the trend of office development were to continue. Significantly, Section 24 of the Ordinance, entitled "Exclusion," specifically exempts office developments which are approved under development agreements, disposition and development agreements, and other agreements duly entered with by the City or Redevelopment Agency from the provision of the ordinance. As described on Page 2 of the Final EIR, the City of Redwood City and the Redevelopment Agency contemplate entering into a development agreement and a disposition and development agreement, respectively, with the developer of the Project. If the Project, as described in Alternative 4 (providing for office uses on Block 2) is approved, pursuant to Section 24 of the Ordinance, the Project will be specifically exempted from the application of the Interim Urgency Ordinance. In addition, the only changes in the Ordinance that affect properties in the Central Business & Retail District ("CBR District") in which the project is included are the following: 1. Under section 26.2 "Insurance Agencies" was deleted as a permitted use in the CBR district and "offices above the ground floor" and "Bail bond businesses above the ground floor" was included in the list of permitted uses. 2. Section 26.3a was amended to provided that the following uses are permitted in the CBR District when accessory to a permitted use under sections 26.2 and 26.4 to provide that "Business office uses on the ground floor which do not exceed 25 percent of the gross floor area or 500 square feet, whichever is less, provided such uses are clearly incidental to the retail sale of products on the premises." 2 h'T---T'. .