AgdaPkt 2011-08-22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

� 8.A. - Page 59 Appeal of the Redwood City Plannina Carnnzission's Certifcation af the Final EIR au�st 3 z> zoio Page 6 of 8 equipzx�ent. The FEIR sumrnarily states tha# no resid�nts wil� be displaced as a result of tf�e project; givez� the sheer size, len� h ar�d clase proximzty of the project to existing bornes, the concIusion simply begs credibility. (The Cnmrrv.ssian's blanket dezual of t.�e existence of az�y significant environmental irnpacts resul�ng from the propased deveiopment gives the unfortunate appearance of s�bordinating the praperty zights and interests flf Iong-ter� ta�cpayers, prnperty o�vners and residents of Redwood City to the developers. We do nat believe the Comrrzission intende�i such a r�sult.) • In prior heaz Comu�ssianer (now �ouncil Member) Seybert regeatedly noted that under current zoning ret�uirements, the sCeeply sloped lots would be des�gnated RH-1D or even RH-25, which carries with it special development and buildout restractions. Neither the FEIR nar fhe Comnaissron has adc�ressed r.he environmental impacts of tY�e project in the context of �heir actual zonin� designatir�ns {althau�h the staff r�port has incYuded such restrictions for comparison purposes). rt seems to us that �e EII2's f�ilure ta take inta account that the app�icant intenc�s to build ho�ses on 7,200-square-foat lats that the City would normatly require to be 30,000 squar� �'eet zs cri�ical. • As a genera� matter, the Mitiga�ion Measures, and t�ie 1Vtitigatfon Monitori.ng arsd Reparting Plan (w�ile reflectang some of th� oratsized r�sks of the proposed project) are far too detailed and ambiEious for effective znonitoring and enfarcement ta occur. See FEIR, Appe�dix A: S�it�bation Monitoring and Reporking Pro�ram, As stated ahave, they also randerestimate the arr��unt r�r scop� of correetive action that would be required to counteract the destruc�i�ve effects of the project. The FEIR does not mentican the added camp�ication r�f monitorinb a major stz d��velopment and then 18 bui�d'zz�g prajects being separately ur�dertaken by numerous individual owners. Other e�arziples of the ]ack o� feasibility ar zz�adeq�aacy c�f prnposed rF�itiga�ion measu�s include: (a} ttxe a pxoposa� to miti�ate the effects of a 15% increase in traffc during the constn�ctior� period by rec��iring "preparatian of a parkin� plan and/or ca�pool Z �'ee, e.g., Min�tes, Plannin� Commission Special Meeting, �cto6er, 7, 2007, pp 4-5 (Commissioner $�ybert asked whether the prr�ject shauld anaIyzed using RH-1� or RH-20 zoning restrictians given the extremely steep natura of much of the site. See. alsr� Minut�s, Planning Conunissinn .Toint Meeting witk� 7.oning Administrator, June 5, 2008, p. 5. luda n� frorr� t.h;e i�edwaod City 2oning Map, it does appear that a signi�cant part of the developznent wou�d be zoned at least [2�i-10. � T'his is �ot to say tt�e MMRP should not he arnbiLious; rather, we betieve the MMRP reflects the disproportionate size and connp�exity of tbe project for this enviranmentally fra�iie area.