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 43 ESA / 202100421.00 Subsequent Environmental Impact Report October 2022 make circulation improvements; lower the parking requirement; require frontage improvements to support active transportation; provide options to allow for increased architectural diversity; or allow for exceptions, at certain sites, to requirements concerning building placement and required minimum heights. Findings Relating to the Reduced Development Alternative Findings. The Reduced Development Alternative is described and discussed on pages 19- 12 to 19-17 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 Transit District DTPP 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 Transit District DTPP Amendments. Explanation. Under the Reduced Development Alternative, impacts related to the intensity of development—traffic; criteria air pollutants, toxic air contaminants, and greenhouse gas emissions; noise and vibration; population or employment; and demand for public services and utilities—would generally be reduced, compared to those of the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments, as described below. All transportation impacts of the Reduced Development Alternative would be less than significant, as with the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments. In fact, the Reduced Development Alternative would result in 22 percent fewer daily vehicle trips and a similar decrease in daily VMT, compared to the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments; and both residential and office VMT associated with this alternative would be below the City’s VMT Thresholds, as under the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments. Like the proposed Transit District 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 Transit District DTPP Amendments. However, the Reduced Development Alternative, like the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments, is conservatively concluded to have a significant unavoidable project and cumulative impact with respect to emissions of criteria air pollutants from individual subsequent development project(s), even with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2a and AQ-2b. The Reduced Development Alternative could result in similar, albeit somewhat lesser, significant health risk impact as would the proposed Transit District DTPP Amendments, and would be similarly reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-3. The Reduced Development Alternative would be consistent with the applicable clean air plan and would have a less-than-significant impact, as under the Transit District DTPP Amendments.