AgdaPkt 2007-02-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Redwood City Downtown Precise Plan City of Rl;ldwood Cily January 24. 2007 Final EIR 3. Comment Documents and Responses Page 3-35 residerlticH, and the building height,differences at issue do not approach the heights proposed under the 2003 Marina Shores Village project. 19.02 Aesthetics and Visual Resources/Land Use and Planningnshadow impacis--DraH E1R findings inconsistent with City urban design policy and with Marina Shores Village Project EIR--land use section discussion of significant land use impacts associated with the Draft Precise Plan relationships to applicable adopted policies does not indicate that substantial shadowing effects would represent a significant impact--Le., would be inconsistent with Redwood City Pfannlng Division Urban Design Guidelines encouraging natural sunlight for all projects; Draft EIR statement that shadow impacts do not represent significant impacts under CEQA inconsistent with CEQA Appendix G, which encourages lead agencies "to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances}"; DEJR finding ignores City's own land use policies. Conclusion also inconsistent with shadow impact conclusion (significant Impact 5-5) in Marina Shores Village Project EfR. Response: See response to comment 19.01. 19.03 Aesthetics and Visual Resources/Land Use and Planning--excessive density and bulk--Preclse Plan provisions for uniform 8-story building wall along Brewster would physically divide the community (I.e., represent a significant impact) (5.3.1) and would be inconsistent with Redwood City Pfannlng Division Urban Design Guidelines stating that excessive building density and bulk shall be disallowed (7.2.4); will be seen by users of the street and residents across the street as a wall physically dividing the downtown from the residential neighborhood. Response: The Draft EIR includes a full and adequate evaluation of the potential land use and aesthetic effects of Draft Precise Plan density and building bulk provisions. Based on that evaluation, the Draft EIR concludes that the Draft Precise Plan building height provisions along Brewster Avenue would not physically divide the community, for the reasons summarized below. The EIR analysis has also determined that the Draft Precise Plan provisions would not result in "excessive building density and bulk' and that a "uniform 8-story building" waif along Brewster W~~_ldb,n.oht bep~lrc.~iye~as.physi~(lI!Y cjiYi.qlng.th~, d()wnt9wn from the resid~ntial neigh or ood, or the reasons summarized below. The comment is incorrect that the Draft Precise Plan provisions would result in a uniform 8-story building wall along Brewster; rather, as illustrated on Figure 7.3 in the Draft EIR, the Draft Plan calls for a "3-story maximum streetwall" along Brewster, 1hen a 20-foot step-back to a maximum building height of 8 stories. As illustrated by Figure 7.2 in the Draft EIR, current zoning permits a maximum building height ot 7 stories along Brewster. The Draft Precise Plan would theretore reduce rather than increase the potential severity of any 'streetwall" effect along Brewster Avenue. The Draft EIR therefore indicates on page 5-16 that the Downtown Precise Plan provisions, including the proposed buifding height provisions along Brewster Avenue, "would not substantially disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the community," but rather "would reinforce, with no substantial change in, established community-wide land use patterns." As further explained on Draft EIR page 7-19: C:\WDVOBS\85!iIFEIAIF-3,655,uex; 98 Page 17