My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE - 75D
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2019
>
06/04/2019
>
CORRESPONDENCE - 75D
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/6/2019 12:19:02 PM
Creation date
6/4/2019 2:59:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Item #
75D
Date
6/4/2019
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
97
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MainPlace Transformation Project <br />City Council Agenda Item 75D <br />June 4, 2019 <br />Page 16 <br />including GHG emissions, energy use, traffic, public services, among others. Here, neither the <br />Addendum nor the Specific Plan itself disclose even an estimate of how many people will live <br />the in 1,900 proposed units. Indeed the Addendum does not disclose how many bedrooms each <br />unit will be. The number of bedrooms per unit will have a direct impact on the number of people <br />inhabiting the 1,900 new units, and the environmental impacts of those units. Without even an <br />estimate of the proposed residential population, the Project's description is incomplete <br />Moreover, CEQA requires an analysis of the full build out of a project, meaning the <br />maximum size project that could be built under the entitlements sought. Stanislaus Natural <br />Heritage Project b. County of Stanislaus (1996) 48 Ca1.App.4th 182, 195-206. Without a limit on how <br />many bedrooms each unit will be, the CEQA analysis must assume the units will all be built with the <br />maximum number of bedrooms permitted. This was not what was analyzed in the Addendum. <br />CONCLUSION <br />For the above and other reasons, the Planning Commission should decline to recommend <br />the City Council approve the Addendum, and instead direct Planning Staff to prepare and <br />circulate an FIR for public review. The City may not rely on the nearly 40-year old 1983 EIR. <br />Sincerely, <br />Rebecca Davis <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.