My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
Reso25 16295
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
City Council
>
2020-2029
>
2025
>
Reso25 16295
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/29/2025 3:54:43 PM
Creation date
4/29/2025 3:53:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Resolution
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
4/28/2025
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
153
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
<br /> <br /> <br />29 <br />would not create new impacts, increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA <br />purposes. <br />e. Ordinarily shadows do not constitute a significant impact under CEQA, so the Focused GPU EIR only analyzed the <br />impact of shadows in the DTPP area to ensure compliance with prior litigation regarding the impact of office towers <br />on the Downtown. <br />The Housing Component is not located in the DTPP. The Housing Component would be required to comply with any <br />applicable shadow analysis requirements of Municipal Code Article 54 – “MUT (MIXED-USE TRANSITIONAL) <br />DISTRICT.” Per the Built Environment Element of the Redwood City General Plan, proposed projects in the MUT <br />(Mixed-Use Transitional District) District are not required to prepare a shade and shadow study. Therefore, a shadow <br />analysis is not required for this component. As a result, no additional shadow impacts are anticipated. The 920 Shasta <br />Street project component would be consistent with the analysis in the Focused GPU EIR and would not create new <br />impacts, increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. <br />CONCLUSION <br />With regard to the issue of Aesthetics, the following findings can be made: (1) no peculiar impacts to the Housing <br />component or its site have been identified, (2) there are no potentially significant effects or off-site and/or cumulative <br />impacts which were not discussed by the EIR/SEIR, (3) no substantial new information has been identified which <br />results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the EIR/SEIR, and (4) no mitigation measures contained <br />within the Focused GPU EIR would be required because the project component specific impacts would be less than <br />significant. For these reasons, the aesthetic impacts of the proposed Housing Component would be consistent with the <br />impacts identified in the Focused GPU EIR and this Housing Component does not require additional environmental <br />review under CEQA Guidelines section 15183. <br /> <br />ATTY/RESO.0028/CC RESO CEQA GUIDLINES (920 SHASTA) - EXHIBIT A <br />REV: 04-22-25 VR <br /> <br />Page 29 of 148
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.