Reso13 PC 13-16 2898 PC Reso Recommending Stanford EIR Certification

Browse Search

through 8-28, Draft �IR appendix 21.4 (Supplemental Air Quality and Climate Change Infarmation), and Final EIR appenclix B (Suppoemental �ay Area Air Quality Management District [BAAQMD] I�formation?, which are hereby incorparated by reference. . Climate Change Impact: Impact 9-7: Sea Level Rise Impacts on Project De�elupment. 8ased on the BCDC sea level rise maps, the project may be affeefed by anticipated sea level rise and associated changes in broader flood plain baundaries. Patential impacts associated with future develo�ment tf�at may be subject to sea lerrel rise include risk to public safety and property damage. Mitigation: Mitigation 9-1. For all new development on the project development site, the City shall ensure that the development compiies with the most current Redwood City General Plan and Redwood City M�nicipal Code requirements for pro#ection fram flofld hazards, consistent with Mitigation 90-3 in chapter 10 (lJtiiities), of the Draft �IR. These provisions would require compliance wit� associated storm drainage storage, building ele�ation, and flood-proofrng reauirements. Finding: Implementation of Mitigation 9-1 wauld reduce sea level rise ir�pacts to a less- fhan-sign�cant level. Facts in Support of Finding: Implementation of Mitigation 9-1 wauld reduce the sea level rise impacts on project development to a less-tt�ar�-sign'rFicant level by ensuring that alf new on-site de�eiopment complies wit� the most current Redwaod City Generaf Plan and Redwoad City Municipaf Code requirements for protection from flood hazards, as described ar�d quantified in Draft EIR chapter 9 (Ciimate Change),wF�ich is hereby incorporated by reference. Cultural and Historic Reso�rces fmpact: Impact 14-1: Project and Cumulative Impacts on Historic Resaurces. The propased Precise Plan cantains development standards that would allow for the demolition of all structures on the de�elopment site, and Stanford has indicated that its long-term p1ar� is ta dernolish afl af the existing structures an the development site and relocate the Ampex sign. Subsection �4.1.3 of the Draft EIR identifies three potential historic resaurces on the development site—the 425 Broadway building, the plaza area with the Warnecke Fountains, and the Ampex sign. Although the historica! resources survey repart and 2009 Circa peer review do not find that any of these three structures are historic resources, the 2009 and 2011 Circa peer review repvrts do suggest special consideratian be given to these structures in the planning process. Some members of the HRAC have indicated that they preliminarify disagree with the canclusions in the reports that these structures are nat potential historic resaurces; however, the HRAC has yet to make a recommendation as to whether these structures shauld be included on the City's register of hEStorical resources. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(a)(4) allows a lead agency to determine t�at a resource is a h istoric resource despite the fact that the resource is not listed in the Cafifflrnia Register of Historical ATTY/RE50.2898/PG RE50 RECOMMENpING STANF4RQ EIR CE#iTIFICATION ftEV:D&15-13 VR Page 14 of 56