Reso25 16298 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

135 7-21): “The CRMP [Cultural Resources Management Plan] also requires that a cultural resources plan be prepared as a standard condition of project approval for all development projects in the amended DTPP area.” As discussed earlier in item V, Cultural Resources, of this checklist, the proposed Commercial Component would not cause a potentially significant impact to any known (recorded) archaeological resources in the project component vicinity. Mitigation Measure CR-3 and the CRMP requirement, both of which shall be required as conditions of approval, would reduce the potential impacts of the Commercial Component on tribal cultural resources to a less-than- significant level. No new or more severe impacts are anticipated than what was analyzed in the EIR/SEIR, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. CONCLUSION: With regards to the issue area of Tribal Cultural Resources, the following findings can be made: (1) no peculiar impacts to the Commercial 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 EIR/SEIR, (3) no substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the EIR/SEIR, and (4) feasible mitigation measures contained within the EIR/SEIR would be applied to the project component and render its specific impacts less than significant. For these reasons, the tribal cultural resources impacts of the proposed Commercial Component would be consistent with the impacts identified in the EIR/SEIR and this Commercial Component does not require additional environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15183. Housing Component: a. i) The Focused GPU EIR found that the potential impacts to tribal cultural resources due to earthmoving construction activities is unknown so the impact was potentially significant. This was reduced to less than significant with mitigation measure TCR-1a, TCR-1b, TCR-2a, TCR-2b, and TCR-3 along with the City’s established development review and Native American consultation process along with applicable regulations. There are currently no identified historic structures on the project component site, according to a records search conducted for the Housing Component applicant by the Northwest Information Center-Sonoma State University (NWIC). While the State Office of Historic Preservation Built Environment Resources Directory (OHP BERD), which includes listings of the California Register of Historical Resources, California State Historical Landmarks, California State Points of Historical Interest, and the National Register of Historic Places, does not list any recorded buildings or structures within or adjacent to the Housing Component site, the existing buildings on site appear in the 1943 and 1961 USGS Palo Alto topographic map (15-minute quadrangle), indicating the buildings are 45 years or older and may be of historical value. As discussed in item V.a (for the Housing Component), a historic resource evaluation was conducted for the existing 122 Buckeye Street and 920 Shasta Street buildings and determined the buildings are not historic structures nor are they eligible for listing with the California Register of Historical Resources or City of Redwood City. Mitigation Measure TCR-3 regarding compliance of future development project applicants with the City’s Historic Resources Management Plan and preparation of a cultural resources plan could also be applicable. This mitigation calls for three actions to be taken by all development projects: (1) a records search conducted by the Northwest Information Center, which has already been prepared for the project component and whose recommendations are included in this section XVIII; (2) interviews of persons knowledgeable about the history of the site, as approved by staff and within a time period designated by staff (and therefore to be coordinated between the applicant and City staff); and (3) review of maps archived at the local history room of the Main Library and other historical data contained in the Redwood City Inventory (also to be coordinated between the applicant and City staff). The Housing Component site is not a City-identified historic site, and as discussed above, the existing onsite building is not eligible for listing on the State or Federal historic register. Therefore, the Housing Component site would not be subject to the other requirements of Mitigation Measures TCR-3 and impacts related to the Housing Component on tribal cultural resources would be less-than-significant. No new or more severe impacts are anticipated than what was analyzed in the Focused GPU EIR, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. ii) The Focused GPU program EIR (p. 4.18-4) notes that the City received no comments regarding the Focused GPU project from tribes notified by the City of the GPU project. As discussed above in section V, Cultural Resources, the Focused GPU program EIR (p. 4.18-1) determined that because the Focused GPU planning area likely contains archaeological resources dating back thousands of years that reflected Native American settlement patterns, the probability of finding archaeological resources in the planning area, including tribal cultural resources, would be moderate to high. In fact, two shell mounds have been identified in the past, one located on Main Street near Woodside ATTY/RESO.0031/CC RESO CEQA GUIDELINES (901 EL CAMINO REAL) REV: 04-22-25 VR Page 135 of 148