AgdaPkt 2009-01-26 clsd and reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

78 Page 4 At the General Plan Workshop on September 27,2008, the public had the opportunity to comment on the Bayfront Area, the existing Cargill Saltworks property use designations, as well as Alternatives 1 - 5. The comments were mixed, with no one clear concept being predominant: . The number of comments supporting Alternative 1: Bair Island Road Neighborhood Expansion and Resource Management and supporting restoration of the wetlands, open space, or resources was roughly equal to the number of comments supporting development proposed under Alternative 3: Seaport Expansion with Office-Technology Emphasis, Alternative 4: Seaport Expansion with Port-Related Industrial Emphasis, and/or Alternative 5: New Mixed-Use Neighborhood with Optional Seaport Expansion. . There were a number of comments that expressed support for the /'50/50 plan" which staff assumes is the concept of a u50-50 balanced approach" put forth by Redwood City Industrial Saltworks. Absent a plan, staff has not been able to determine enough information about any aspect of this concept for the sake of public discussion. Process Options for the Cargill Saltworks Property There are two process options for addressing the Bayfront Area - and the Cargill Saltworks property: 1. Continue to include the Cargill Saltworks property in the New General Plan process. 2. Partition the Cargill Saltworks property from the Bayfront study area, leaving the uUrban Reserve Area" and uOpen Space" land use designations unchanged for later study, thereby creating a 2-step general plan process. Such a concept is not new as it was previously considered during the initial scoping of the New General Plan and the subsequent Measure W discussion. Ultimately, the decisions reached were to continue a comprehensive general plan process. Legal counsel for the City has reviewed the proposed 2-step approach and has concluded that it would comply with all applicable law, including the Planning and Zoning Law and the California Environmental Quality Act C'CEQA "). Government Code section 65358 expressly allows cities to prepare general plan amendments that only apply to portions of a city's jurisdiction. Further, separate processing of general plan amendments for different areas of the city would not violate any prohibition in CEQA against segmentation of projects. Under applicable case law, the City would only have to analyze future land uses of the Cargill Saltworks property if such land uses were a reasonably foreseeable consequence of a general plan amendment. Under the 2-step process, the City would not be making any determinations or commitments as to future land uses of the Bayfront Area as part of the initial general plan amendment, so the initial Programmatic EIR would not be required under CEQA to specifically address any such land use determinations. However, the initial PEIR would have to address potential cumulative impacts of the initial general plan amendment together with other probable future projects. In preparing the PEIR's cumulative impact analysis for the initial general plan amendment, the City may face some challenges in determining how to address the Bayfront Area. At present, because the future designation of the Bayfront Area is unknown and subject to much debate, it is legal counsel's initial opinion that the initial PEIR's analysis of cumulative impacts would not be obligated to assess any future development of that area. However, if property owners submit formal development applications for that area, it may behoove the City to consider cumulative impacts of such proposed development as part of its cumulative impacts analysis.