Reso23-14 Reso 0048 PC23-14 PC Reso Recommending Certification of the SEIR GP & DTPP

Browse Search

Findings and Statements Required by the California Environmental Quality Act Redwood City DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments 51 ESA / 202100421.01 Subsequent Environmental Impact Report May 2023 • Create safe and healthy opportunities for children and youth to grow, learn, and play; • Encourage economic growth in the community through the creation of construction and full- time jobs; • Make circulation improvements; • Lower the motor vehicle parking requirement to reflect actual demand and best practices; • Require building frontage improvements to support active transportation; • Accommodate certain rooftop recreational uses providing project amenities or benefits; • Accommodate the potential for Research and Development (R&D) laboratories in the DTPP area, as a conditionally permitted use; or • Allow some development flexibility by permitting limited exceptions to building placement requirements. Additionally, the No Project Alternative would be inconsistent with the direction in Plan Bay Area, the Bay Area’s regional Sustainable Communities Strategy, to focus growth in existing communities along the existing transportation network. By not encouraging this imminent future growth in population and employment in areas that are well-served by transit and within close proximity to activity hubs, the number and length of vehicle trips would likely increase, thereby increasing GHG emissions and VMT. The No Project Alternative would also hinder Redwood City’s ability to meet its obligation to provide new housing under the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process, and could potentially result in a comparable amount of growth occurring in less sustainable, transit-friendly locations of Redwood City or other communities. Findings Relating to the Reduced Development Alternative Findings. The Reduced Development Alternative is described and discussed on pages 19-14 to 19- of the DSEIR. The Reduced Development Alternative is hereby rejected because it would not be expected to substantially reduce or avoid any of the significant effects of the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments, and because this alternative would not achieve the City’s housing and office development-related related objectives for the Project to the same degree as the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. Explanation. Under the Reduced Development Alternative, impacts related to the intensity of development— emissions of criteria air pollutants, toxic air contaminants, and greenhouse gases; noise and vibration; population and employment; and demand for public services and utilities — would generally be reduced, compared to those of the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments, as described further below. Like the proposed Plan-Wide DTPP Amendments, the Reduced Development Alternative would result in a lesser percentage increase in VMT than in service population, and therefore this alternative would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, and the Plan-level impact would be less than significant, as with the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. However, the Reduced Development Alternative, like the proposed DTPP Plan- Wide Amendments, is conservatively concluded to have a significant unavoidable project and cumulative impact (Impacts AQ-2 and C-AQ-1) with respect to emissions of criteria air pollutants