Laserfiche WebLink
May 19, 2021 <br />Page 25 <br /> <br /> <br />5005-004acp <br /> <br /> printed on recycled paper <br /> As discussed in our Comments and herein, there is substantial new <br />information demonstrating that the Project is likely to result in significant effects <br />related to hazardous materials, health risk, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, <br />noise, and transportation that are not mitigated, let alone substantially mitigated, <br />by the City’s standard conditions of approval. There is therefore substantial <br />evidence demonstrating that the Project will be detrimental to the public health, <br />safety and the general welfare of San Leandro residents, and that the Project would <br />create adverse impacts that were not adequately analyzed or mitigated before the <br />Board approved the Project. The Board, therefore, lacked substantial evidence to <br />support its findings to approve the Project under the Zoning Code. <br /> <br />The City Council must remand this Project to Staff to complete a thorough <br />environmental review in an Infill EIR in order to satisfy Zoning Code and State <br />land use law requirements. <br /> <br />IV. THE CITY’S “AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF PLANNING <br />APPEAL FEES” VIOLATES APPELLANTS’ DUE PROCESS <br />RIGHTS <br /> <br />Pursuant to City Codes and the Appeal Fee Schedule, Residents were <br />charged $568 for the Planning appeal fee and $534 for the City Clerk fee.109 These <br />Appeal fees were reasonable and are not contested by Residents. <br /> <br />However, in order to file this Appeal, Residents were also required to sign a <br />form titled “Agreement For Payment Of Planning Appeal Fees” which purports to <br />require Appellants to “pay all direct costs as listed in the City’s adopted fee schedule <br />for the review and processing of application(s) for the subject project” including but <br />not limited to “hourly personnel charges plus a factor of 3.38 for benefits and <br />administrative overhead; legal fees; communications via telephone or written <br />correspondence with the appellant, property owner, architect, engineer, etc.; <br />analysis and preparation of staff reports and findings; and attendance at public <br />hearings.”110 The Form also purports to require the appellant to “hold the City <br />harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by the City <br />or held to be the liability of the City in connection with the City’s defense of its <br /> <br />109 See Exhibit 1. <br />110 See Exhibit 1, p. 2. <br />84