AgdaPkt 2013-09-23 Closed and Regular

Browse Search

8.A. - Page 395 SS' I. A W FIRM L L i' March 14, 2013 VLA ELECTRONIC AND FIRST CLASS AWL Members of the Planning Commission City of Redwood City 1017 Middlefield Road Redwood City, CA 94064 .. %, li kl.I RI I� 1,',I TI'F.2ip0 4R;\(.I hi 4.i 1C— ; , � ,, IIawlit a.1 "m CHR—VKZ E R WADE DOT= TM (415) 343-3088 chns@ssll ,-xT=n.corn Re: Revised Final Environmental Impact Report for Laurel Way Jaint Venture Dear Commissioners: We represent the Laurel Way Joint Venture ("LWIV") with regard to its application for a Planned Development Permit to construct up to 16 houses on 4.75 acres and preserve an open space easement on Laurel Way (the "Project) in Redwood City (the "City"). This Ietter responds to the letter submitted by Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger ("SMW I on February 14, 2013, ou behalf of. Save Laurel Way, requesting that the City recirculate the Final Revised Environmental lmpact Report ("Final EMR") for the Project as a second draft EIR. The City appropriately determined that recirculation of the Final EIR was not warranted in this case. There is no significant new information: there are no significant environmental impacts (new or old), no increases in the severity of environmental impacts, and no new alternatives being rejected. Rather, the Final EIR simply clarifies, amplifies, and makes insignificant modifications to the already adequate Draft EIR to reflect that the Project is now smaller in scope and proposed impact than what was initially proposed. Under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA" ), recirculation is the exception rather than the rule. "The Legislature did not intend to promote endless rounds of revision and recirculation of EIR's. Recirculation was intended to be an exception, rather than the general rule. Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1993) b CalAth 1112, 1132. Recirculation is only required where significant new information has been added to the EIR. Public Resources Code ("PRC") § 21092.1. "Significant new information" is defined by CEQA Guideline 15088.5(a)(1) through (4) as a disclosure that the project would have a new significant environmental impact, that there would be a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact, that there is a feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from those analyzed that would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, or that the draft EIR was so fundamentally flawed that meaningful public review was impossible. SMW's letter misstates this definition of "'significant new information," conveniently omitting the critical caveat to the definition of "information," that "neer information added to an {2369-0002!04305711;2}