AgdaPkt 2010-10-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.A Attache ag.et 45 • nted for this area and immediate surrounding areas, minimizing the would be implemented g � g likelihood such development might occur here. Additionally, the No Project Alternative would maintain lower intensity designations along the El Camino Real and Broadway corridors. Industrial land uses would also remain along the eastern portions of the Broadway Street corridor and near the Port of Redwood City, similar to the proposed project. However, areas just south and north of the Port of Redwood City would be maintained as industrial, rather than being converted to commercial land uses as proposed by the New General Plan. Under the No Project Alternative, the southern portions of Bair Island would maintain the designation for future urban development rather than being designated as open space as per the New General Plan. The No Project Alternative is not expected to meaningfully avoid or substantially reduce any of the significant and unavoidable impacts that may result from the New General Plan. As noted above,the City has identified four potentially significant and unavoidable impacts that may result from implementation of the New General Plan: (i) potential conflicts between anticipated growth levels in the City and the air quality planning efforts of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD); (ii) increased traffic that is substantial in relation to existing traffic load and may result in unacceptable levels of service on some roadways; (iii)increased demand for potable water that could exceed the City's available supplies; and (iv) potential risks associated with rising sea levels due to global warming. The No Project Alternative would not meaningfully avoid or reduce conflicts between anticipated growth levels in the City and BAAQMD's air quality planning efforts. The authors of the Draft EIR concluded that adoption of the New General Plan would pose a conflict with the BAAQMD planning efforts because the level of growth in Redwood City projected under the New General Plan is greater than the level of growth assumed by BAAQMD in its current (2005) Clean Air Plan (CAP), which relied on the growth projections used in the City's 1990 General Plan. While this conflict in the growth projections between the New General Plan and the CAP was identified by the Draft EIR's authors as a significant and unavoidable impact in the DEIR, this conflict is likely to be resolved when BAAQMD completes its current process to update the CAP sometime in late 2010 or early 2011, because BAAQMD typically relies on Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) figures for its growth assumptions in the CAP, which are based on each local government's adopted general plans, if available. Consequently, if the City adopts the New General Plan in October, as expected, the growth projections in the New General Plan would likely be used by ABAG and by BAAQMD for their own future planning purposes, which may include the 2010 (or 2011) BAAQMD CAP. Moreover, the New General Plan contains numerous new policies and programs intended to improve local and regional air quality, in conformance with and consistent with various air quality planning efforts of BAAQMD, including the current and proposed CAPs, which policies and programs are not contained in the 1990 General Plan. The implementation of these policies and programs under the New General Plan, which would not be required under the No Project Alternative, would be expected to substantially reduce the potential air quality impacts of the New General Plan, and result in air quality benefits that would not result from implementation of the No Project Alternative. Therefore, the City concludes ATTY/RESO/RESO.2055/ATTACHMENT1.A 31 10/6/10