Laserfiche WebLink
<br />KUIHN IU~~tK LL~ <br /> <br />iax; fla-~ab-~Uj~ <br /> <br />HUg L~ Luur u~.jlam rUUj/UU~ <br /> <br />RUTAN <br /> <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW <br /> <br />Robert O. Owen <br />Direct Dial: (714) 641-3482 <br />E-mail: bowen@rutan.com <br /> <br />August 29, 2007 <br /> <br />Mayor and Members of the City Council of the <br />City of San Leandro <br />835 E. 14th Street <br />San Leandro, CA 94577 <br /> <br />Re: Final Enviromnental Impact Report for Downtown San Leandro <br />Transit-Oriented Development Strategy <br /> <br />Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: <br /> <br />I am writing on behalf of Norcal AI, LLC, in opposition to the above-identified project <br />. and Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") and urge you to: (1) deny certification of the EIR . <br />prepared for the project; and (2) reject the proposed zoning amendment as it establishes the SP-l <br />zone, and includes the property located at 1550 East 14th Street in the newly created DA-l zone <br />(the ~'Property")_ Please include this letter in the official record of proceedings relating to the <br />City's consideration of the EIR and the project. <br /> <br />Among other things, the EIR fails to adequately describe the project (including its scope), <br />fails to identify and adequately analyze all the potentially significant environmental impacts of <br />the underlying project with sufficient specificity, fails to adequately identify and analyze a <br />reasonable range of alternatives to the project, is based on outdated and incorrect infonnation, <br />and is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Further~ there are insufficient findings <br />for a statement of overriding considerations and insufficient evidence to support the findings that <br />are being made. All potential impacts must be analyzed in an EIR. See, Kings County Farm <br />Bureau v. City a/Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App_3d 692. <br /> <br />1. Inadequacies Of The EIR: <br /> <br />lnadequate Project Description <br /> <br />· The EIR fails to describe the project with sufficient details such that the public <br />can determine the scope and impacts of the project. The "project," as analyzed in the <br />EIR, is de~cribed as the amount of potential development for the TOD Strategy area <br />above and beyond what was envisioned in the General Plan and e~amined in the General <br />Plan EIR; namely, construction of 2,841 residential Wlits. The project description fails to <br />include the fact that the TOD strategy results in a proposed reduction of approximately <br />75,000 sq. ft. in retail commercial and approximately 60,000 sq. ft. of reduced office, <br />which affects all of the analysis throughout the EIR. <br /> <br />A1.l15!'1 &. T!icker, UP I 511 A;1tor. Blvd, Su'ite ~400, Cos,a M;2sa, CA 92626 <br />PO BOlC 1950. Costa Mesa, CA 92€28-1950 I 714-641-5100 i Fax 7U-546-9035 <br />Orange County i Palo ,!I.ito I w....w. rutan.com <br /> <br />2~23S92-OO 15 <br />839'n 1.0 I .o~!2"107 <br />