Reso24 16252 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

30 c. and d. The Focused GPU EIR noted that there is no forest land nor are there timberland resources in Redwood City. The City’s “urban forest” is comprised of a street tree system, trees on parks and other public lands, and trees on private properties and in yards throughout the city, particularly in older neighborhoods. The Focused GPU planning area does not include any portions dedicated to the conservation and protection of forestry resources, including any forest land or timberland, and does not contain any such lands (Focused GPU program EIR p. 4.2-1). There are no conflicts with existing zoning for forest land, timberland, or timberland production, nor is there cause for rezoning of any such land, and no impact would occur as a result of the proposed project component. Because the 847 Woodside project component would not have impacts on forest land or timberland resources, it would be consistent with the analysis within the Focused GPU EIR. It would not create new impacts, or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. e. As noted above, the EIR/SEIR specified there are no agricultural, or forest land resources in the DTPP or vicinity and there was no impact on these resources. Because there are no current or planned agricultural or forest land activities in the vicinity of the proposed project component. No impact would occur as a result of the proposed 847 Woodside project component. This is consistent with the analysis within the Focused GPU EIR. It would not create new impacts, or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. CONCLUSION With regards to the issue area of Agricultural / Forestry Resources, the following findings can be made: (1) no peculiar impacts to the 847 Woodside project component or its site have been identified, (2) there are no potentially significant effects or off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the Focused GPU EIR, (3) no substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the Focused GPU EIR, and (4) no mitigation measures contained within the Focused GPU EIR would be required because the project component specific impacts would be less than significant. For these reasons, the agricultural / forestry resources impacts of the proposed project component would be consistent with the impacts identified in the Focused GPU EIR and this project component does not require additional environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15183. ATTY/RESO.0074/CC RESO 847 WOODSIDE (CEQA) - EXHIBIT 1 - CEQA CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST REV: 10-23-24 VR Page 30 of 135