|
<br />
<br />
<br />104
<br />Component site are single-family residential, multi-family residential, warehousing, manufacturing, service and repair
<br />facility, and retail (restaurant and laundromat) land uses. The Housing component would provide additional multi-
<br />family residential opportunity to an area that includes a mix of residential, industrial and commercial area. As
<br />discussed in item #8 (Project Description), the Housing Component applicant (Abode Communities) has submitted a
<br />density bonus request to the City for five concessions and one waiver. These concessions/incentives are requested to
<br />provide sufficient space necessary to make the project component 100 percent affordable. Density bonus projects
<br />receive protection under the Housing Accountability Act. If a housing development project is entitled to a density
<br />bonus under the Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915), then the density bonus does not count as a
<br />violation of the local general plan, zoning code, etc. Likewise, if a housing development project is entitled to waivers
<br />or concessions of local rules under the Density Bonus Law, those waivers or concessions do not count as violations
<br />of the local general plan, zoning code, etc. Therefore, the Housing Component would be compatible with existing
<br />zoning (Mixed Use – Transitional – Shelter) and land uses as designated by the existing Redwood City General Plan
<br />(see General Plan Figure BE-6: Land Use Map). For these reasons, it would have a less than significant impact. The
<br />Housing Component would connect into the existing transit network and would not create any barriers that would
<br />physically divide the community. The Housing Component would be consistent with the analysis in the Focused GPU
<br />EIR because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial
<br />importance for CEQA purposes.
<br /> As discussed in the Focused GPU program EIR (p. 4.11-16), future housing development associated with
<br />implementation of the Focused GPU would be required to be consistent with the General Plan, including policies and
<br />programs adopted for the purpose of avoiding or reducing adverse physical effects on the environment. The Focused
<br />GPU program EIR (p. 4.11-16) also discussed Plan Bay Area 2050 and determined that the Focused GPU would be
<br />consistent because it would advance housing development and residential growth promoted in Plan Bay Area 2050.
<br />For these reasons, the impact of the Focused GPU was considered to be less than significant.
<br /> The Housing Component implements the General Plan. The General Plan envisions Woodside Road, along which the
<br />subject site is located, as being part of a key residential and commercial corridor (Page BE-27 – BE-28) and designates
<br />the site for a mix of residential, neighborhood-serving commercial, and viable light industrial uses that reflect the
<br />transitional nature of the area from lower density residential or light industrial to higher density mixed-use or more
<br />commercial, industrial, or urban areas. The Housing Component proposes multi-family residential development,
<br />which is consistent with the site’s General Plan land use designation and zoning district. The Housing Component
<br />would connect into the existing transit network and would not create any barriers that would physically divide the
<br />community. In addition, the Housing Component is consistent with Redwood City General Plan Policy BE-22.2,
<br />which states that performance criteria and standards should be applied to all new development projects, with the level
<br />of application commensurate with the scale of development. Policy BE-22.2 (Focused GPU program EIR pp. 4.11-
<br />12 and 4.11-13) identifies a list of performance criteria and standards including, but not limited to: (1) availability of
<br />adequate water supplies to serve new development; (2) achieving adopted service standards for pedestrian, bicycle,
<br />public transit usage, and motorized vehicle mobility; (3) limiting new development within the floodplain or ensuring
<br />new development incorporates extra precautions for floodplain location; (4) minimizing direct or indirect impact to
<br />sensitive biological resources; (5) incorporating sustainability features that minimize energy and water use, limit
<br />carbon emissions, provide opportunities for local power generation and food production, and provide areas for
<br />recreation; and (6) providing a measurable and/or clearly identifiable community benefit in the form of affordable
<br />housing, jobs generation, available parkland or open space, environmental hazard protection, and/or other criteria
<br />established by the City. These and other environmental topics are discussed throughout this document in item XIX,
<br />Utilities and Service Systems; item XVII, Transportation; item X, Hydrology and Water Quality; item IV, Biological
<br />Resources; item VI, Energy; item VIII, Greenhouse Gas Emissions; as well as in the project description (item #8
<br />above) and elsewhere throughout the document. These sections conclude that the Housing Component has either no
<br />impact or a less-than-significant impact for these environmental topics, and confirm that this component does not
<br />cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the
<br />purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Because the Housing Component would be consistent
<br />with the Focused GPU, there would be no significant environmental impact due to a conflict with the General Plan,
<br />zoning ordinance, or associated regional plans (e.g., Plan Bay Area 2050). No land use planning impacts are
<br />anticipated beyond those previously identified and analyzed in the Focused GPU program EIR, and this impact would
<br />be less than significant. The Housing Component would be consistent with the analysis in the Focused GPU EIR
<br />because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance
<br />for CEQA purposes.
<br />CONCLUSION
<br />ATTY/RESO.0031/CC RESO CEQA GUIDELINES (901 EL CAMINO REAL)
<br />REV: 04-22-25 VR
<br />
<br />Page 104 of 148
|