AgdaPkt 2012-02-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8. B. - Page 7 resources to pursue this farther." In their December 13 comment letter, Adams Broadwell suggests that this statement by the BAAQMD staff person supports their claims regarding the adequacy of the EIR's air quality analysis. City's response: The statement by the BAAQMD staff person indicates that another BAAQMD staff person concluded, preliminarily and based on just a brief review, that the TAC emissions estimate in the EIR might be low. This statement also indicates that BAAQMD did not perform a substantial review of the Project's air quality analysis. As BAAQMD did not follow up with the City on this issue, or provide any comments on the EIR, the City did not have an opportunity to respond to this comment or explain its analysis. And it appears from this correspondence that BAAQMD staff made a decision, based on their limited resources and brief review of the Project, that this potential issue did not merit any further allocation of BAAQMD's staff resources. The cryptic email conversation between the BAAQMD staff person and the Adams Broadwell lawyer raises no specific objections to the EIR's air quality analysis and does not constitute or provide substantial evidence that the EIR's air quality analysis is inadequate or defective in any way. The City's air quality expert has concluded that the Project's potential TAC impacts on future residents of the Project site are fully analyzed and disclosed in the EIR in accordance with BAAQMD guidelines and CEQA requirements, as discussed in the Final EIR and in City's written response to Final EIR comments (Attachment 6). 7. Jobs and Affordable Housinq: The appeal is also based on the appellant's contention that the City failed to ensure that the Project approvals provide good jobs and affordable housing in Redwood City. City's response: The appellant's comment on the City's need to provide good jobs and affordable housing is not a comment on the EIR and does not raise any CEQA issues. See Section II below, discussing the basis for the second appellant's appeal. II. Basis of Second Appellant Appeal The Redwood City Local Housing Committee appealed the Planning Commission's certification of the EIR and related Project approvals because the Project "does not include housing at affordability levels that meet the need of the community and therefore is not a good fit for the community" (Attachment 3). City's Response The basis of this affordable housing appeal is not a comment on the Final EIR and does not raise any CEQA issues. Rather, it is a comment on the nature and affordability of the Project itself.