Laserfiche WebLink
8.A. - Page 74 <br /> City's response: This issue is addressed fully in Sections 3 and 4 of the staff <br /> report and in prior staff reports (including at pp. 16-18 and 21-27 of the January <br /> 28, 2014 staff report in sections regarding the General Plan and the sufficiency of <br /> the environmental review). These discussions explain, for example, that the <br /> termination of live-aboard rights was properly reviewed under CEQA and will not <br /> cause a significant environmental impact. In fact, the original iteration of the <br /> Project studied in the EIR proposed the termination of all live-aboard rights and <br /> determined there was no environmental impact. <br /> Moreover, the 2012 Memorandum incorrectly asserts that the EIR relied on the <br /> Westpoint Harbor approval as a "silver bullet" for slip loss mitigation. The EIR <br /> actually assumed that 50 live-aboard boards would be displaced even if <br /> Westpoint Harbor provided new live-aboard opportunities but still concluded that <br /> displacement of live-aboards would not create a significant environmental impact <br /> because there was no evidence that displacement would necessitate the <br /> construction of replacement housing elsewhere. (See 2003 EIR, pp. 6-16, 6-17.) <br /> Thus, the 2012 Memorandum incorrectly asserts that the Westpoint Harbor <br /> project was treated as a mitigation plan, and that it no longer can be. Further, <br /> currently, there are no live-aboards at Pete's Harbor. Thus, approval of the <br /> Project will not cause the loss of live-aboards. <br /> Appellant's Position: The EIR did not adequately study potential land subsidence. <br /> (2012 Memorandum, p. 9.) <br /> City's response: The EIR studied the environmental issues related to Appellant's <br /> contentions, including without limitation regarding the contents of the soil, <br /> topography, seismicity, and foundation and settlement impacts. (See Chapter 11 <br /> of the EIR, including at p. 11-12.) <br /> Appellant's Position: The EIR does not address sea level rise issues. (2012 <br /> Memorandum, p. 9.) <br /> City's response: This issue is addressed fully in the staff report for this item. <br /> E. Approval of the Project Will Not Jeopardize Affordable Housing <br /> Appellant's Position: The Project will negatively affect the provision of affordable <br /> housing. (2012 Memorandum, p. 10.) <br /> City's response: The Project advances the City's housing policies, including <br /> affordable housing policies. General Plan policies encourage the development of <br /> new housing, as well as a wide variety of housing types, to further the City's <br />