My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
Reso23-02 0009 PC Reso Adopt CEQA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
Planning Commission
>
2023
>
Reso23-02 0009 PC Reso Adopt CEQA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/21/2024 2:54:26 PM
Creation date
10/21/2024 2:54:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Resolution
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
Planning Commission
Date
1/31/2023
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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 />Focused General Plan Update 28 <br />Final Environmental Impact Report January 2023 <br />construction materials and California Government Code §51182 regarding defensible space. The <br />Redwood City Building Code also requires fire retardant roofing (§R905.1.3) and fire sprinklers <br />(§903.2). <br />The General Plan contains adopted policies and implementation programs related to <br />reducing risks to people and structures from runoff, post-fire slope instability, and drainage <br />changes, and proposed policies and implementation programs in the Public Safety Element Update <br />would also help reduce or avoid risks to people and structures from runoff, post-fire slope <br />instability, and drainage changes. Redwood City and San Mateo County requirements for <br />individual project applicants to submit geotechnical reports would ensure development facilitated <br />by the Project would meet geological and flooding safety standards. Therefore, with <br />implementation of existing and proposed General Plan policies and implementation programs and <br />compliance with existing requirements for individual development projects, this impact would be <br />less than significant. (Draft EIR, pp. 4.20-23 to 4.20-25) <br />6.2. Cumulative Impacts <br />6.2.1 Aesthetics: The proposed Project would not make a substantial contribution to a significant <br />cumulative impact with respect to aesthetics as follows (Draft EIR pp. 6-3 to 6-4): <br />(1) Because the vast majority of the Planning Area is urbanized, incremental changes resulting from <br />the proposed Project, in addition to similar incremental changes in the surrounding area, would not <br />result in cumulative impacts with respect to scenic vistas. <br />(2) Development facilitated by the Project is not expected to substantially disrupt views from an <br />officially designated state scenic highway, and therefore, the proposed Project would not make a <br />substantial contribution to a cumulative significant impact to a scenic highway. <br />(3) Development facilitated by the Project would be subject to the City’s underlying zoning, <br />development, and architectural standards and would be located where similar existing uses occur, <br />they would not result in a significant visual change such that the existing visual character or quality <br />of project sites and their surroundings would be substantially degraded. The proposed Project <br />would not substantially contribute to cumulative significant impacts that would degrade the existing <br />visual character or quality of the area and its surroundings. <br />(4) Project-related impacts with respect to light and glare were determined to be less than significant <br />because future development would be subject to review and approval by the City prior to approving <br />building permits to ensure that light and glare impacts are less than significant. Therefore, <br />development facilitated by the Project would not substantially contribute to a cumulative light and <br />glare impact. <br />6.2.2 Agriculture and Forestry: The City of Redwood City General Plan and Zoning do not <br />designate land for agricultural production or timber harvesting within the City limits. The proposed <br />Project would not remove land from agricultural production, rezone agricultural lands to <br />accommodate proposed development, or place development in a location where it may impact <br />existing agricultural operations. As the Project would not impact agricultural or forestry resources,
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.