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 54 ESA / 202100421.01 Subsequent Environmental Impact Report May 2023 Effects related to the footprint of subsequent development projects would generally be the same as or similar to those of the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. This is because the locations of subsequent development projects would not necessarily change, although lesser office development would occur within the amended DTPP area. Because any change in the footprint or size of subsequent development projects, if any, cannot be known at this time, it is assumed that excavation could potentially disturb archaeological or tribal cultural resources, potentially occur on expansive soil, and potentially disturb paleontological resources to the same or a similar degree as would be the case with the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. Likewise, the Altered Land Use Mix Alternative could result in the same or similar disturbance of nesting birds and removal of trees that could result from construction of subsequent development projects in the amended DTPP area, and could result in new shading affecting shadow-sensitive uses. Finally, this alternative could, like the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments, result in the same or similar development on potentially expansive or corrosive soils. Each of these impacts—Impact AE-5, CR-2, CR-4, BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-5, GEO-4, and GEO-6—would be less than significant with mitigation under the Reduced Development Alternative, as would be the case with the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. Like the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments, the Reduced Development Alternative could develop projects in place of, or adjacent to, eligible historic structures. As a result, adverse impacts to historic structures could occur and Mitigation Measure CR-1 would be required to preliminarily determine whether or not the project may have a potentially significant adverse effect on the historic resource, while Mitigation Measure CR-2 would still be required to review proposed development adjacent to a historic resource to determine whether such development could adversely affect an adjacent historic resource. Further, Mitigation Measure NO-3 would be required to reduce ground- borne vibration levels, which primarily occurs during construction. While these mitigation measures would reduce the severity of impacts to historic structures, they would not necessarily reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level, and Impacts CR-1 and C-CR-1 would remain significant and unavoidable, as with the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. As discussed above, on the whole, due to the overall reduced scale of development, this alternative was found to provide a greater decrease in significant environmental impacts, compared to those of the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments, than the Altered Land Use Alternative. However, this alternative would not avoid the significant and unavoidable cultural (historical) resources, air quality, and climate change impacts of the proposed DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments. Moreover, the Reduced Development Alternative would result in a new significant (but mitigable) impact with respect to vehicle miles traveled per office employee. In addition, to the extent that the demand for additional developed space that would otherwise be built pursuant to the proposed project would be met elsewhere in the Bay Area, employees in and residents of such development could potentially generate greater impacts on transportation systems (including VMT), air quality, and greenhouse gases than would be the case for development on the more compact and better-served- by-transit project site. This would be particularly likely for development in more outlying parts of the region where fewer services and less transit access is provided. It is acknowledged that the Reduced Development Alternative would incrementally reduce local impacts in and around the project site and in Downtown Redwood City, while potentially increasing regional emissions of criteria air pollutants and greenhouse gases, as well as regional traffic congestion. Further to the extent that the demand for