AgdaPkt 2007-02-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Redwood City Downtown Precise Plan City of Redwood City January 24. 2007 Final EIR 3. Comment Documents and Responses Page 3-34 19. Gregory J. Ryken. ESQ., Tobin & Tobin; December 18, 2006 19.01 Aesthetics and Visual Resources--shadow impacts--Draft E1R does not adequately address shadow impacts on northern edge of the downtown on the property at 601 Brews1er Avenue; shadow study by Theodore Brown illustrates that plan will substantially shadow this property due to permitted g-story buiiding height to the south; shadow probfem avoided on Maple Street by transition sub-zone provisions at southern edge of downtown. Response: The EIR discusses shadow impacts in chapter 7 (Aesthetics and Visual Resources), on page 7-21 (Shadow Impacts), which states, in part, "The proposed Precise Plan would facilitate the construction of new 5-to-12 story buifdings that could cast substantial shadows on adjacent commercial, office, and public areas during part of the year." In particular, the'cbmrhMfis correct that the Draft Precise Plan-proposed changes in building height allowances along the south side of Srewster Avenue may result in substantial shadow effects on the property at 601 Brewster Avenue. As illustrated by Figures 7.2 and 7.3 in the Draft EIR, the Draft Precise Plan includes a proposed change in the maximum allowable building height en 601 Brewster from 7 stories under current zoning to 5 stories, and a proposed change in the maximum allowable building height on the properties immediately south ot 601 Brewster from 7 stori.as under curreht zoning 10 8 stories, creating a revised'maximum building envelope that could result in a substantial shadow effect on 601 Brewster. However, as the Draft EIA text explains on page 7-21, .shadowll is generally not an environmental topio area under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which dictates the scope and contents of EIRs. For this reason, "shadowll is not identified as an environmental impact category in either the Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form (Draft EIR appendix 20.2) or in the Draft EIR significance criteria for aes1hetlcs and visual resources (Draft EIR subsection 7.3.1, page 7-6), both of which are derived directly from the CEQA Guidelines (2006. Appendix G), P:;s4!1eCity interprets its General Plan policy, and as demonstrated in the Marina Shores Village Project EIR, a shadow effect is considered to represent a significant environmental impact only where it would have a substan1ial negative effect on a re~.lgl?mi?,1 JtY11Jg. ~nYJ.rp.nm~nl., A $UQ$l~nti.aJ l'l.egatillaeffect Qna ,residential, living, environment would be inconsistent with City General Plan policy (Land Use Element Policy L-1) calling for the protection of residential land uses from other land uses "whIch may have a negative impact on the residential living environment," and would therefore represent a significant environmental impact under signifioance criterion 5.3.1 (2) on Draft EIR page 5-13--Le., "would conflict with [an) applicable land use...policy...of the City of Redwood City...adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect." Such a finding was made in the City's 2003 Marina Shores Village Project EtR (Impact 5-5) where, in that unique situation, a significant portion of an existing residential use would be in shade or shadow "throughout the year" or "throughout much of the year" due to the project. In the unique Marina Shores Village project situation, three 23-story and three 2" -story highrise structures were proposed for location within approximately 100 to 600 feet from an existing 155-unit 4-story residential complex (the VBlages at Bair Island) and immediately adjacent to planned 2- to 4-story townhouse residential uses, The Downtown Precise Plan situation cited in this comment involves a substantially different set of circumstances. The subject property at 601 Brewster is not C:\WDVOBS\655iFEIR\F{J655.doc Ex 1f:r:~Pf · ~ ' I 98 Page 16