AgdaPkt 2020-11-09 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Ms. Lindy Chan, Principal Planner City of Redwood City, Planning Services August 9, 2019 Page 7 Relative to Request 14, the Draft EIR should also address the location of current planned school sites in all affected school districts, both to determine the adequacy of the space existing or available for school facilities and also to address traffic, student safety and related impacts affected by a school's location. The population elements addressed in Request 16 are essential because the ultimate impact of growth can best be determined by comparing existing student enrollment, expected future enrollment, and total school capacity. Request 17 is a necessary consideration because certain school facilities may have been designated for particular community uses, or otherwise be unavailable for full classroom service, meaning that they cannot be considered in determining the District's total capacity. Also, some classrooms are dedicated as labs, meaning that they cannot hold the full compliment of students that would occupy a traditional classroom, again affecting a school's total capacity. Requests 18 and 19 are included because they are relevant to the social impacts which may stem from the Project. Again, such impacts are relevant to the extent they are caused by or result from physical impacts, which would include growth. (Pub. Res. Code § 21001(g); Cal.Code Regs., tit. 14, §§ 15021(b), 15131(a) -(c), 15142 & 15382.) If classrooms become overcrowded, or certain programs cannot be offered because of overwhelming student demand, the community's educational services are harmed, a clear social impact. Further, overcrowded classrooms create additional safety concerns, both for students and teachers. Requests 20 through 24 deal with fiscal impacts on the District. The most immediate means of determining whether school overcrowding will occur is to determine first whether the District has adequate available capacity, and second, if not, whether it has adequate sources of funding available to construct new facilities or expand existing ones. This requires consideration of how much it costs to house each student, and how much of that amount can be covered by existing funding sources. To the extent that the existing sources prove insufficient, the difference is an unmitigated impact on the District. Finally, Request 25 again seeks to ensure that a cumulative impact analysis is conducted, as there has been significant development approved and projected within the District's borders. Conclusion The District is not anti -development. However, the needs of the District must be appropriately considered in the environmental review process for all proposed new development that will impact the District, such as the Project. The District is hopeful that it will be able to collaborate with the Developer and the City in order to identify and propose solutions that alleviate the impacts caused by Developer's Project, and is prepared to provide any information necessary to assist the City in preparation of the EIR and in addressing each of the comment and scope/content issues set forth above.