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

Browse Search

Ms. Lindy Chan, Principal Planner City of Redwood City, Planning Services July 13, 2020 Page 8 intended to require the State and local taxpayers to shoulder a disproportionate portion of the cost of school facilities. SB 50 declares that the payment of the developer fees authorized by Education Code section 17620 constitutes "full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act on the provision of adequate school facilities." (Gov. Code § 65995(h); see also, Gov. Code § 65996(a).) However, California courts have since acknowledged that developer fees do not constitute full and complete mitigation for school -related impacts other than school overcrowding. (Chawanakee Unified Sch. Dist. v. Cty. of Madera (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 1016 ("Chawanakee").) Chawanakee addressed the extent to which the lead agency (Madera County) was required to consider school related impacts in an EIR for new development. The court determined that SB 50 does not excuse a lead agency from conducting environmental review of school impacts other than an impact "on school facilities." The court required that the County set aside the certification of the EIR and approvals of the project and take action necessary to bring the EIR into compliance with CEQA. (Id. at 1029.) In so holding, the court explained as follows: [A]n impact on traffic, even if that traffic is near a school facility and related to getting students to and from the facility, is not an impact 'on school facilities' for purposes of Government Code section 65996, subdivision (a). From both a chronological and a molecular view of adverse physical change, the additional students traveling to existing schools will impact the roadways and traffic before they set foot on the school grounds. From a funding perspective, the capped school facilities fee will not be used by a school district to improve intersections affected by the traffic. Thus, it makes little sense to say that the impact on traffic is fully mitigated by the payment of the fee. In summary ... the impact on traffic is not an impact on school facilities and, as a result, the impact on traffic must be considered in the EIR. (Id. at 1028-29.) Thus, contrary to the assertions of the City in the Initial Study and Draft EIR, the payment of fees does not constitute full mitigation for all impacts caused by development, including those related to traffic, noise, biological resources, air quality, pedestrian safety, and all other types of impacts related to the District and its educational program. The City's approach is significantly flawed and inconsistent with the requirements of Chawanakee, as it failed to analyze 27 sub- categories of information that are necessary to determine whether the Project results in significant environmental impacts both to and related to schools. Specific areas where the Draft EIR and Initial Study failed to adequately evaluate school -related impacts are discussed below: i. Traffic/Transportation/Circulation Though the Draft EIR generally analyzes the traffic impacts anticipated by the Project, its analysis is inadequate, particularly as related to schools. The following issues require the City to revise and recirculate the Draft EIR.