AgdaPkt 2019-02-11 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

CLK-Pamela Aguilar 'rom: Lisa Hicks-Dumanske < > sent: Sunday, February 10, 2 To: GRP -City Council Subject: comment on the Harbor View project draft EIR (DEIR) I live less than two miles from the proposed Harbor View site. I commute most days through the Woodside Road/Hwy ioi intersection. I therefore encourage the City Council to not move forward with this project (Harbor View) and to only consider projects that conform to existing land use and zoning codes. Please reconsider your prior decision and not move forward with a General Plan Amendment. Rather than move forward with this proposal, the Council should instead encourage the developer to return with a project that conforms to the existing General Plan and Zoning Code regulations for the site. Below are some reasons why the General Plan should not be changed for Harbor View. Amending the General Plan for this project will: 1. Bring thousands of more cars daily to an area that does not have the infrastructure to support the increase. Traffic impacts will be significant and unavoidable according to the draft EIR; they will negatively impact the ability of businesses on Seaport Blvd. to efficiently transport goods and significantly lengthen commute times for thousands of Peninsula commuters. The draft EIR projects that the average vehicle miles traveled per day per employee will be 26 miles, indicating that many, if not most, employees ,Aril] be living far from Harbor View and traveling to work by car. 2. Exacerbate the City's current housing shortage and housing affordability crisis by significantly driving up housing demand. The draft EIR underestimates this effect by claiming that the City's capacity to build more than 33oo additional housing units will partially mitigate this effect. In fact, the available capacity estimate used in the DEIR is outdated, as more than i000 units have been built or are under construction since that evaluation was made. Furthermore, the DEIR fails to consider that there is already more than 2.8 million square feet of office space approved, proposed, or under construction in Redwood City - all in areas approved for office development in the General Plan. These offices will more than use up available capacity, even if the Harbor View site remains vacant. The City cannot continue to approve large office -only development - in particular amending the General Plan to do so - otherwise, drastic land use changes in the future will be required to increase housing capacity within the city limits (such as developing existing parks or open space, such as the Cargill salt ponds). 3. Erode the capacity for Redwood City to broaden its economic base via light - industrial activities. The site is perfectly suited for industrial uses, being adjacent to the Port, rail and freeway, and far from residences. Industrial activities provide economic diversity to the City which will help mitigate the negative effects of economic downturns. Furthermore, industrial operations provide well -paying, long term jobs for blue collar workers. Developer and trade association/union claims of the benefit to construction jobs for this project are short term only. Office construction can occur elsewhere in the City (with union labor) without the need to amend the General Plan. 4. Potentially hinder the ability to preserve and expand the Port of Redwood City and its supporting industries. A major goal of the General Plan is to preserve and enhance Port operations, which is an asset critical to the regional economy. Upzoning the Harbor View site will raise land values and potentially encourage redevelopment of adjacent industrial facilities critical to Port operations. The current General Plan land use for the Port area resulted from an extensive community visioning process. If the City wishes to now encourage high density office development northeast of ioi, it should do so as part of a new community visioning process that looks at all areas of the city likely to redevelop in the future - not do so in an ad hoc fashion via parcel -specific General Plan amendments.