My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
4B Public Hearing 2015 0720
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2015
>
Packet 2015 0720
>
4B Public Hearing 2015 0720
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2019 9:05:15 AM
Creation date
7/30/2015 5:42:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Staff Report
Document Date (6)
7/20/2015
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2015 0720 CS+RG
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2015\Packet 2015 0720
2A Business 2015 0727
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2015\Packet 2015 0727
8G Consent 2015 0908
(Amended)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2015\Packet 2015 0908
Ord 2015-008
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Ordinances\2015
Reso 2015-126
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
PALMIERI, TYLER, WIENER, WILHELM &-WALDRON <br />Members of the San Leandro Planning <br />Commission <br />June 18, 2015 <br />Page 2 <br />Skewed information results in the unsupported assertion that impacts will be "less than <br />significant." <br />In the small San Leandro submarket, the project proposes a brand new 200 -room <br />hotel (New Hotel) directly across and in front of The Marina Inn. The New Hotel <br />impacts view. Whether by design or by consequence, the result is that the future <br />relevance of The Marina Inn is compromised at a level that is more than significant. The <br />EIR's inadequate analysis proves the point. <br />The inadequacies include, but are not limited to: <br />• The EIR's aesthetics section is incomplete and contradictory. It <br />inexplicably asserts that the project will cause "less than significant" <br />impacts to view. Staff and the developer want to say there are no impacts, <br />so there is no analysis. Commissioner Collier previously stated on the <br />record, the analysis is deficient and the conclusion can and was skewed <br />based on the viewer's perspective points. If a study situates the "viewer" <br />where there will be no view impacts, a conclusion will be reached that there <br />will be no view impacts. Of course, such a study is inherently invalid. <br />Many comments were provided to the Draft EIR regarding the important <br />views from and to the Marina area and concerns about the deficient <br />aesthetic "analysis" conducted in the Draft. The critical comments include <br />comments from the members of the Planning Commission. The proposed <br />Final EIR disregards these comments. It claims that the comment only <br />expressed an opinion of the commenter or it refers back to the deficient <br />aesthetics section. <br />• The EIR's Urban Decay Analysis (Appendix B) provides another false <br />analysis. The conclusion reached in Appendix B is incredible. Staff and <br />the developer have hired a consultant to assert 2+2=5. That the consultant <br />concluded 2+2=5 neither controls nor persuades. The City's economic deal <br />with the developer has not been disclosed. The economic deal supposedly <br />has not been approved. It is not intellectually honest to make claims about <br />the New Hotel's impact on the Marina Inn unless the public (and the <br />consultant preparing the Appendix B report) knows and "economic" deal <br />terms between the developer and the City. <br />1557190.2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.