Reso PC22-06 0079 PC Reso Recommending Certification of the SEIR

Browse Search

Findings and Statements Required by the California Environmental Quality Act Redwood City Transit District DTPP Amendments 7 ESA / 202100421.00 Subsequent Environmental Impact Report October 2022 within a PDA included in Plan Bay Area 2050; and the Transit District area is adjacent to a high- quality transit corridor, and in an area planned for future housing and job growth. The proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments would also not conflict with the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for the Environs of San Carlos Airport. The City submitted the proposed action to the C/CAG of San Mateo County – the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for San Mateo County - for a determination of consistency with the ALUCP prior to issuing a permit for the development. C/CAG ALUP recommended approval of the consistency determination, and has forwarded it to C/CAG Board of Directors to take final action. With approval of the proposed General Plan and DTPP amendments, the Transit District DTPP Amendments would achieve consistency with the Redwood City General Plan (including the DTPP) because it would further the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs of the General Plan. Lastly, because the DTPP maps would be amended and land use controls and development standards within the Transit District Area would be adjusted, the Transit District DTPP Amendments would not conflict with the City’s Zoning Code or other applicable development standards. Overall, the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments and impacts related to conflicts with plans and policies would be the same as those identified in the DTPP Final EIR and would not result in new or more severe impacts. This impact would be less than significant. (Draft SEIR, pp. 4-12 to 4-16.) 5. Population and Housing Impact PH-1: Implementation of the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure). The proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments would cause the population of the DTPP to increase, however, this growth would be consistent with City and regional plans for growth and would not represent substantial unplanned growth. Any necessary infrastructure improvements would be sized to serve proposed development within the Transit District area, and not to make adjacent areas available for additional development. Some of the employees generated by the new office space proposed under the DTPP Amendments would be able to reside in the 1,100 new residential units that could be constructed; and the new housing demand that is not met on-site would be met in other parts of the city and the region, particularly given the Transit District area’s transit accessibility, which would allow new employees to access transit-served areas throughout the region. Overall, while the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments would result in planned, direct population growth and may result in some indirect induced growth, the growth would be consistent with regional plans and for this reason population and housing impacts from the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments would not result in new or more severe impacts than the impacts identified in the DTPP Final EIR. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. (Draft SEIR, pp. 5-8 to 5-12.)