My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
Reso23-14 Reso 0048 PC23-14 PC Reso Recommending Certification of the SEIR GP & DTPP
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
Planning Commission
>
2023
>
Reso23-14 Reso 0048 PC23-14 PC Reso Recommending Certification of the SEIR GP & DTPP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2023 12:11:27 PM
Creation date
8/16/2023 12:09:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Resolution
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
Planning Commission
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Findings and Statements Required by the California Environmental Quality Act <br />Redwood City DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments 52 ESA / 202100421.01 <br />Subsequent Environmental Impact Report May 2023 <br />from individual subsequent development project(s), even with implementation of Mitigation <br />Measures AQ-2a and AQ-2b. The Reduced Development Alternative could result in similar, albeit <br />somewhat lesser, significant health risk impact as would the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide <br />Amendments, and would be similarly reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation <br />of Mitigation Measures AQ-3a, AQ-3b, and AQ-3c. Subsequent development proposed under the <br />Reduced Development Alternative would not include any major sources of odor, and therefore odor <br />impacts would be less than significant, as with the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. <br />Even with implementation of Mitigation Measure CC-1, the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide <br />Amendments could result in significant impacts on climate change because the City’s Reach Codes <br />allow limited exceptions to the requirement for all-electric buildings (i.e., no natural gas). <br />significant cumulative climate change impacts as with the project. Mitigation Measure CC-1 would <br />apply to this alternative, but Impacts CC-1, CC-2, and C-CC-1 are considered significant and <br />unavoidable, as with the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. <br />With the same land uses at a reduced intensity, compared to the DTPP Plan-Wide <br />Amendments, the Reduced Development Alternative could result in similar, albeit somewhat <br />lesser, construction noise impacts as the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments, and these impacts would <br />likewise be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of Mitigation <br />Measure NO-1. <br />With the same land uses at a reduced intensity in at least some of the same locations as the <br />DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments, the Reduced Development Alternative could result in similar, <br />albeit somewhat lesser, building equipment noise impacts as the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments; <br />these impacts would likewise be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of <br />Mitigation Measure NO-2. Like the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments, as this alternative <br />would generate approximately 5 percent fewer daily vehicle trips than with the proposed DTPP <br />Plan-Wide Amendments. <br />With the same land uses at a reduced intensity, compared to the DTPP Plan-Wide <br />Amendments, the Reduced Development Alternative could result in similar, albeit somewhat <br />lesser, construction- generated vibration impacts as the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments, and these <br />impacts would likewise be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of <br />Mitigation Measure NO-3. Effects related to airport noise would be less than significant with this <br />alternative, as with the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. <br />With the same land uses at a reduced intensity, compared to the DTPP Plan-Wide <br />Amendments, the Reduced Development Alternative would have less-than-significant impacts with <br />respect to population and housing, as with the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. Regarding <br />jobs/housing balance—although not explicitly identified as a topic for consideration under <br />CEQA—the Reduced Development Alternative would have essentially the same ratio of jobs to <br />employed residents as would the proposed project, because it would reduce both office space and <br />residential units by approximately one-third compared to the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide <br />Amendments.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.