AgdaPkt 2021.02.08 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.A. - Page 9 of 36 NEXT STEPS The review process for the Transit District will differ from the Gatekeeper process, which required General Plan Initiations. At the February 2020 meeting, the City Council emphasized the need for this to be a City - led process and staff has initiated that City -led process over the last year. Staff will continue community engagement while concurrently proceeding with environmental review. A General Plan Amendment Initiation is not required. Opportunities to comment further on environmental topics, station design, project design, land use concepts, and grade separations will be available throughout the likely 18-24 month process. This feedback will further direct the ultimate Transit District standards, grade separation design, and station concepts. Staff anticipate the following next steps in the review process: • Environmental Review - Begin environmental review in Spring 2021 for proposed land development/uses and proposed circulation changes. It is important to note that while the project description sets the upper limit for land uses for environmental analysis, the City continues to have the right to modify the final land use mix within the project envelope. Staff are continuing to evaluate how to process environmental review for the Transit District, Gatekeeper and other projects that require DTPP amendments. Staff will update the City Council and community on the review process once it is determined. Generally, staff is considering three options: 1. Bundling similar projects into small groups (2-3 maximum) with CEQA review being project -specific with General Plan/DTPP amendments requiring individual City Council action. 2. Bundling the CEQA review for all of the projects but process entitlements separately. This could result in the City Council potentially certifying one EIR, but requiring each project to move forward with individual GP/DTPP amendments. 3. Bundling the CEQA and DTPP Amendments for all projects. With this approach, the City Council would take one action to certifythe EIR and amend the DTPP caps. Project entitlements would follow this action and be checked for consistency with the Program EIR and the updated DTPP (Similar to the previous DTPP process). • Conceptual Land Use Project Review— High level conceptual review of Sequoia Station would occur concurrently with the Transit District. The development application cannot be deemed complete until the Transit District regulations have been adopted by the City Council. However, the conceptual development plans for Sequoia Station would be revised and reviewed by the City for consistency with the City -led Transit District as that District is developed, and staff will continue to coordinate with the JPB on their parcel. The Transit District will need to be adopted prior to final project approvals. Either the Planning Commission or City Council could have final project approvals; staff recommend City Council have final project approvals. • Grade Separation Design — With additional feedback from the community, the City Council will select a preferred alternative and phasing approach for grade separations. After that, the grade separation project would proceed to preliminary design and environmental review once funding is identified. This would be a multi-year process requiring significant City and other agency funding. Page 9 of 12 City of Redwood City 1017 Middlefield Road, Redwood City, CA. 94063 Tel: 650-780-7000 www.redwoodcitV.org 185