My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2019-12-16 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2019
>
AgdaPkt 2019-12-16 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2020 12:17:00 PM
Creation date
12/13/2019 1:39:49 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
12/16/2019
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.
/
866
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
7.D. - Page 50 of 126 <br />City of Redwood City <br />Mixed -Use Live/Work and Emergency Shelter Zoning Amendment Project <br />Impact 4.10-5: Aircraft noise over proposed areas where Less than <br />As described in the Final EIR, the San Carlos Airport is the closest <br />The proposed project would <br />residential use would be allowed under the General Plan would significant with <br />airport or airstrip to the project site. While some areas of <br />result in less than significant <br />exceed City noise thresholds, which could expose individuals mitigation <br />Redwood City are in identified airport's noise contours, no areas <br />impacts from aircraft noise. <br />living and working within the plan area to excessive noise levels. <br />that would be zoned MULW are part of these contours (County <br />No new or more severe <br />changes to the development standards in the MULW district. No <br />of San Mateo 2017). As stated in the Final EIR, no private airstrips <br />impacts would occur. <br />identified in the General <br />are located in or near the project area. The closest airport is the <br />Impacts would be within <br />balance would occur. The Final EIR also recommended mitigation <br />San Carlos Airport, located approximately one mile away. <br />the scope of those <br />As discussed above under Impacts 4.10-1 through 4.10-4, <br />identified in the General <br />without assurances of water availability, which would also apply <br />construction and operation of the uses allowed under the <br />Plan EIR. <br />proposed MULW zoning district would not increase noise levels <br />beyond those analyzed in the Final EIR. Therefore, the proposed <br />project would not expose people working at the project site to <br />excessive noise levels. <br />Population and Housing <br />Impact 4.11-1: Adoption of the General Plan would allow Less than <br />development of up to 9,103 additional dwelling units in the plan significant with <br />area and potentially create 28,002 jobs, which would directly mitigation <br />and/or indirectly induce population growth. <br />34 <br />The proposed project could generate up to 1,269 new residents. <br />The proposed project would <br />However, population growth under the proposed project would <br />result in less than significant <br />represent an increase of 1.4 percent over growth projections <br />impacts from population <br />analyzed in the Final EIR for the year 2030. Furthermore, similar <br />growth. No new or more <br />to the land use policies analyzed in the Final EIR, the proposed <br />severe impacts would <br />project does not include individual development projects, only <br />occur. Impacts would be <br />changes to the development standards in the MULW district. No <br />within the scope of those <br />changes to existing General Plan policies concerning timing of <br />identified in the General <br />development, infrastructure concurrency, or jobs -housing <br />Plan EIR. <br />balance would occur. The Final EIR also recommended mitigation <br />measures to further strengthen General Plan Program BE -22 to <br />ensure that new development would not be able to proceed <br />without assurances of water availability, which would also apply <br />to the proposed project. <br />651 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.