My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2010-10-11
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
AgdaPkt 2010-10-11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2015 1:07:15 PM
Creation date
10/7/2010 3:42:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
10/11/2010
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
245
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
- I <br /> 7.A <br /> 9/30/2010 9:36 AM Page 79 <br /> "catalyst " . All <br /> All > of this without any substantive analysis of the growth <br /> IIPproducing impact <br /> > of the Seaport line . <br /> > <br /> > There ' s a simple solution to this - remove the Seaport line <br /> from the GP, <br /> > while retaining the policies to encourage a Port Master Plan <br /> and <br /> > construction of a ferry terminal at the port . If, when those <br /> plans reach <br /> > fruition, it is determined that a streetcar line along Seaport <br /> would be <br /> > beneficial to serve those needs , it could be introduced and <br /> evaluated <br /> > fully in that context . I think the City needs to put the <br /> horse back in <br /> > front of the cart . The Seaport line should not be in the <br /> plan now, since <br /> > its purpose is contrary to the proposed land uses there . <br /> > <br /> > The second issue has to do with GP alternatives . The DEIR did <br /> elan <br /> > alternative analysis and concluded that Alternative #2 was the <br /> > environmentally superior option. If I understand CEQA <br /> correctly (and I ' m <br /> > getting pretty good at it) , CEQA' s alternatives analysis is <br /> not simply an <br /> > intellectual exercise - environmentally beneficial <br /> alternatives must be <br /> > adopted if feasible . PRC 21002 states that : <br /> > <br /> > "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if <br /> there are <br /> > feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures <br /> available which <br /> > would substantially lessen the significant environmental <br /> effects of such <br /> > projects, and that the procedures required by this division <br /> are intended <br /> > to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both <br /> the <br /> > significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible <br /> alternatives or <br /> > feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or <br /> substantially lessen <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.