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

Browse Search

Ms. Lindy Chan, Principal Planner City of Redwood City, Planning Services October 27, 2020 Page 6 capita VMT in Redwood City," was inadequate. (Draft EIR at 3.5-28.) The District also requested that the Final EIR analyze additional categories of information, including the cumulative impacts on schools and the community in general resulting from increased vehicular movement and volumes expected from additional development already approved or pending. In response, the Final EIR provides simply that "[b]ecause the proposed project would generally improve transportation safety, there is no potential for any substantial contribution to a significant cumulative impact on safety, and no cumulative analysis is warranted specific to this issue." (Final EIR at 3-26.) Because the Draft EIR failed appropriately to analyze how the Project's impacts on traffic and transportation will impact District students and staff traveling to and from school, the Final EIR's cumulative impacts analysis, which relies on the Draft EIR, is likewise flawed. In again failing to provide sufficient information in order to allow the District to analyze the above -discussed impacts, the Draft EIR, as modified by the Final EIR, remains deficient. The District hereby preserves its objections regarding same. ii. Noise While the District appreciates the Final EIR's analysis regarding potential construction and traffic noise impacts on the District, the District maintains its objections included in the July 13 letter. The Draft EIR, as modified by the Final EIR, should have included a formal and extensive noise study analyzing in depth the impacts of any noise sources and volumes which may affect school facilities, classrooms, and other outdoor areas. iii. Air Quality The District maintains and preserves its objections regarding the air quality analysis contained in the Draft and Final EIR. iv. Population and Housing In its July 13 letter, the District listed five categories of information that the Draft EIR needed to include in order for the District to understand whether the proposed Project would have significant physical and fiscal impacts related to population and housing. While some of this information was included in the Final EIR, other necessary information was excluded. The District reiterates its July 13 letter population and housing objections to the Draft EIR, as well as the District's requests for information. IV. Streamlining Review of Parcel F The District noted in its July 13 letter that the Draft EIR relied upon three EIR streamlining or tiering mechanisms in contending that the Draft EIR does not need to analyze the environmental impacts caused by development of the Project on Parcel F. As explained in the Draft EIR Appendix CNA, however, each of these streamlining or tiering mechanisms applies only insofar as the proposed Project would not pose any new, project -specific, significant impacts not previously analyzed by the City in its Downtown Precise Plan (DTPP), and/or would not