Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Memorandum <br />Redwood City - Saltworks Tier One Summary Reports <br />January 26,2010 <br /> <br />7A - ATTACHMENT NO.1 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />II. Background and Goals <br />Hart Howerton and consultant team was retained by Redwood City on September 14th, 2009 to assist <br />the City in reviewing and processing the Saltworks development proposal. Hart Howerton was <br />charged with three specific goals: <br /> <br />1. Determine if the Application is adequate for the sake of continued City review. If <br />inadequate, then determine what information would be required for an adequate <br />Application. <br /> <br />2. Identify and verify assumptions within the Application, assess their validity, and <br />identify any other issues or concerns that might be associated with those <br />assumptions. <br /> <br />3. Establish a reliable and useful system for keeping policy makers, the public and <br />the applicant informed about the initial application review process. <br /> <br />III. Process <br />Hart Howerton and City staff reviewed the development proposal and identified a set of significant <br />topics regarding the proposal. It was also determined that although many of the topics are complex, <br />there was enough information to determine that the majority of the topics were adequate to allow <br />continued City review, with the exception of three specific topics. These topics were categorized as <br />"Tier One": Jurisdictional, Water Demand/SupplY, and Transportation/ Circulation. <br /> <br />Tier One Summary Report Preparation <br />Hart Howerton and City Staff agreed that these topics warranted additional analysis, review <br />and information prior to the City continuing the review process and initiating CEQA. Hart <br />Howerton and City Staff worked together to assemble a team of expert consultants to review <br />the Tier One topics and prepare objective, third-party summary reports for the City's use. <br />The objectives of these reports were to provide preliminary assessments of: <br />entitlement challenges and requirements, <br />project feasibility, <br />potential policy decisions that must be made by the City and/or other federal, state <br />and local agencies, and lastly <br />fundamental insurmountable issues that would preclude the continued processing of <br />the development proposal. <br /> <br />Over the last three months, the Peer Review Teams completed a top level review of the <br />development proposal as well as relevant City, regional and contextual information for each <br />Tier One topic. Requests for additional information were also prepared and sent to the <br />applicant in instances where unclear, incomplete or unsupported information was described <br />in the proposal. Additional information was submitted by the applicant, which in turn was <br />reviewed, assessed and in some cases, clarified. The three reports are organized with an <br />Executive Summary, which contains the key [mdings and conclusions, and the main body, <br />which contains technical and more detailed information. <br /> <br />Page 2 <br />