My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
Reso PC22-08 0085 PC Reso Recommending CEQA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
Planning Commission
>
2022
>
Reso PC22-08 0085 PC Reso Recommending CEQA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2024 11:34:07 AM
Creation date
7/31/2024 11:33:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Resolution
Date
11/1/2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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 />Harbor View Project PAGE 40 OF 48 ESA / 170951 <br />Final Environmental Impact Report October 2022 <br />ATTY/RESO.0085/PC RESO RECOMMENDING CEQA – EXHIBIT A <br />REV: 11-02-2022 VR <br />cumulative air quality impact (as discussed below), it would not fully meet the fundamental <br />objectives of the Harbor View Project, and it is a no project scenario. <br />Explanation. Under the “50/50 No Project/Existing Zoning” Alternative, impacts related <br />to the newly introduced R&D Lab use, decreased service population, slightly increased <br />floor area although in fewer structures, would generally be reduced in intensity, compared <br />to those of the proposed Revised Project. Reduced are impacts to traffic, air quality, total <br />greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and the resulting demand for public services and utilities. <br />While this alternative’s total greenhouse gas emissions would be less than Revised <br />Project’s, its GHG emissions per service population could reasonably be higher due to the <br />lower service population associated with the R&D Lab + Ancillary R&D Office use (FEIR <br />Table 5-2). <br />Since this alternative would not require a General Plan Amendment to accommodate its <br />buildout, it would avoid the conservatively significant cumulative air quality impact <br />identified for the Revised Project (Impact AIR-1.CU) (exceeding growth assumptions of the <br />2017 Clean Air Plan). However, even though this alternative would have fewer vehicle <br />trips than the Project, as stated in the overarching alternatives assumptions in the DEIR <br />(DEIR p. 5-8), no reduced scenario would likely avoid the significant impacts under the <br />City’s current congested peak hour roadway conditions. <br />The “50/50 No Project/Existing Zoning” Alternative would not fully meet the most <br />fundamental objectives of the Revised Project, in that it would not: <br /> Develop a lively working environment with office uses within the Inner Harbor to <br />promote innovation and creativity. <br />Conservatively, no assumptions are made for this alternative regarding its provision of <br />recreation or open space, amenities, and bicycle/pedestrian connections onsite. Since this <br />three structures are proposed with this alternative, it is possible that the Revised Project <br />objectives regarding the internal orientation and clustering of buildings could be achieved <br />to some extent. <br />Findings Relating to the Reduced Buildout and Building Height Alternative. <br />Findings. The “Reduced Building and Building Height” Alternative is described and <br />discussed on pages 5-20 to 5-24 in the DEIR and is summarized relative to the Revised <br />Project in Table 5-2 of the FEIR. It is hereby rejected from further consideration because <br />it would not substantially reduce or avoid any of the significant effects of the proposed <br />Revised Project. As the “Reduced Building and Building Height” Alternative is modified <br />slightly from the Revised Project (which the Project Applicant introduced in the FEIR; see <br />Table 5-2 in the FEIR), it would meet most of the fundamental objectives of the Harbor <br />View Project. As discussed on page 5-43 of the DEIR, “Reduced Building and Building <br />Height” Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative as it would generate the <br />fewest peak-hour and daily vehicle trips compared to each of the development alternatives, <br />and thereby reducing the significant traffic impacts to the greatest extent.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.