AgdaPkt 2008-07-28 Clsd and Reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8A Page 14 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA, SUBMITTING TO THE VOTERS A PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 92 of the Charter of the City of Redwood City, Section 3 of Article XI of the California Constitution, and section 9255 of the Elections Code of the State of California, the City Council of Redwood City may submit to the voters proposed Charter amendments; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the interests of the City to submit to the voters a proposed amendment to the Charter of the City of Redwood City that would require majority voter approval at a municipal election of future development of the Cargill Lands, consisting of approximately 1,450 acres of land east of Highway 101 and south of Seaport Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the City Council is authorized and directed by statute to submit the proposed charter amendment to the voters; and WHEREAS, by separate resolution the City Council intends to submit the proposed Charter amendment before the voters at a Special Municipal Election on November 4, 2008; and WHEREAS, the proposed Charter amendment is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). It is not a "project" under CEQA because it will not result in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (Pub. Res. Code, S 21065; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14 ("Guidelines"), S 15378.) The proposed amendment does not alter the General Plan or Zoning Code, change any land use designations, approve any project, or restrict any development. It requires only that if a future development project on Cargill Lands is proposed in the future, such project must be ratified by the voters before it is valid. Further, submitting the proposed Charter amendment to the voters is not "approval" of a project because it does not commit the City to a definite course of action. (Guidelines, S 15352.) No project has been proposed for the Cargill Lands and CEQA review will be appropriate only if or when any such project is proposed. The proposed amendment states that any future project is subject to CEQA. Therefore, CEQA review at this time would be premature and speculative and would not allow any meaningful analysis of potential impacts. (Friends of the Sierra Railroad v. Tuolumne Park & Recreation Dist. (2007) 147 Cal.AppAth 643, 655-656; Concerned McCloud Citizens v. McCloud Community Services Dist. (2007) 147 Cal.AppAth 181.) ATTY/RESO/RESO, 1839 072408 1