AgdaPkt 2008-04-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

78 approval was not considered final; rather it was contingent upon other necessary Page 6 jurisdiction/agency approvals.1 Nevertheless, as previously described, the College District has since withdrawn their PO application with the City and has submitted a new/revised PO application to the Planning Commission for consideration at a date yet to be determined. The Woodhiill Estates appeal of the previous PO permit approval is thus no longer relevant. CEQA Appeal: Woodhill Estates, through their legal counsel Miller Starr Regalia, also contends that a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or environmental impact report (EIR) should have been prepared for the project because the MND prepared by the District and the Addendum prepared by the City do not adequately identify or analyze all the land use and planning impacts of the project (Le. privacy, aesthetics/views, noise, safety and traffic) with respect to the approvals that must be granted by Redwood City (General Plan Amendment, Prezoning and entitlements) for the project. On September 26, 2007, the College District Board of Trustees, acting as the Lead Agency, adopted the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and approved the project. With implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the MND, it was determined that all identified impacts would be reduced to less than significant. On November 16, 2007, Planning staff also prepared an Addendum to the MND to provide clarifying information in the MND related to Redwood City's General Plan Land Use Designation for the site and the precise location of the CitylTown jurisdictional boundary. The Addendum provides the corrected technical data, but does not result in any new conclusions about project impacts or mitigation measures (i.e. the corrected information does not result in new significant environmental impacts nor increase the severity of previously identified environmental impacts). On November 27, 2007, the Planning Commission considered the Initial Study/MND, and Technical Addendum prior to making their recommendation to Council to approve the General Plan Amendment, prezoning and annexation. The Initial Study/MND and Addendum, previously provided to the City Council, were prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164. ALTERNATIVES 1. Do not deny the appeal and revoke the previously approved Planned Development Permit. 2. Do not approve the General Plan designation, Pre-zoning, Property Tax Exchange and RHNA housing unit exchange agreement with the Town of Woodside. 1 Redwood City City Council approval of the project site's General Plan designation, Prezoning and property tax exchange; the Town of Woodside's Property Tax Exchange; and LAFCO property annexation. 4/24/08