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

Browse Search

The Honorable Mayor Diane Howard/City Council Page 5 August 7, 2020 would be inconsistent with the City's General Plan. It would also be highly questionable from a land use planning standpoint, given the sensitivity of this use juxtaposed against the light, noise, odors and traffic invariably associated with heavy industrial uses. This appears to be a textbook case of incompatible land uses. Under CEQA, the consequence of proposing such incompatible land uses side by side is clear: a project which proposes a land use which is incompatible with a community's General Plan is a potentially significant land use impact under Section 15125(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, which must be analyzed and mitigated if feasible to a level of insignificance. Therefore, because the "reasonably foreseeable" relocation of the Maple Street Shelter to industrial property at 1402 Maple Street is a potentially significant land use impact under CEQA, this impact must be analyzed and mitigated if feasible. Because the original 1548 Maple Street EIR did not do so, and the Addendum, incorrectly, chose not to do so, the City must insist that this analysis occur before the Project can be approved by the City, not only to comply with CEQA, but to provide the public with meaningful opportunity to review and provide input into how the City's property at 1402 Maple Street should be utilized. And, because relocating the shelter would constitute a significant environmental impact not analyzed in any prior CEQA documentation, a Supplemental EIR must be prepared for the Project under Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, and not an Addendum.' The City Should Also Carefully Examine the Land Use Implications of the Proposed Land Exchange Agreement CEQA aside, Graniterock also requests that the City keep in mind that its property at 1402 Maple Street has long been considered an important cornerstone piece of the City's industrial, Port -serving area. Not only is this property designated for industrial uses under the General Plan, it was also the subject of the Inner Harbor planning process and various other proposals for possible development. We understand the haste of the County's approval of the Project, to attempt to secure vital funding for support services, but, before the City conveys the 1402 Maple Street site away, the Redwood City community, including the business stakeholders within City's Port area, should have a chance to weigh in. We should also point out that, if the City conveys the 1402 Maple Street property to the County, the County will presumably take the position that the property would be exempt from the City's land use planning laws, including the General Plan, under Government Code Section 53090 et seq. The City and community may therefore lose any meaningful opportunity to participate in the vision for this important property. We urge the City Council to take the time needed to ensure that the City's priorities and the community are best served by the Project. 3 A Supplemental EIR, and not an Addendum is required because, at a minimum, the Project proposes a "reasonably foreseeable" land use which is inconsistent with the City's General Plan, and which is, itself, a potentially significant environmental impact requiring analysis. There may be other impacts associated with moving the Maple Street Shelter, in addition to this land use impact, which require analysis under CEQA, including potential traffic, air, noise and, given the location of the site, biological or other environmental impacts. It is not currently known whether any other such impacts would be presented by the relocation, because the Addendum fails to study the relocation.