8B Public - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

File Number: 25-134 Staff recommends that the City Council approve the project and adopt Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment A, Exhibit C) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, which finds that the benefits to the project outweigh the potential environmental effects. The EIR also includes mitigation measures addressing potentially significant impacts regarding Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Transportation and Tribal Cultural Resources. With implementation of mitigation measures, these impacts would be reduced to a less -than-significant level . PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On February 6, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing and voted 4-2 (one vacancy) to certify the Environmental Impact Report and approve the project . Four comment letters were received between February 1 and February 6, and these were provided to the Planning Commission in advance of the public hearing. Comments were received from the Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance, Advocates for the Environment, and Mitchell M. Tsai/Carpenters Local 713, which submitted two comment letters. These letters addressed air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation measures, use of a local workforce to reduce vehicle trip length and emissions, biological resources, noise and vibration, energy use, inadequacy of the Draft and Final EIR to evaluate impacts and identify all feasible mitigation measures and failure to adequately address previous comments. Three members of the public attended the meeting. One spoke in support of the project and two spoke against the project. Discussion at the Planning Commission hearing included various topics, including whether and how natural gas should be made available to future tenants and safe bicycle access to this site. Some informational questions were asked regarding the applicant’s plans for hiring construction contractors. Draft minutes of the February 6, 2025, Planning Commission meeting are included as Attachment G. BASIS OF APPEAL The appeals of Advocates for the Environment and Mitchell M. Tsai/Carpenters Local 713 restate the comments made by these organizations on the Draft and Final EIR and to the Planning Commission. Topics addressed include air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, vehicle trip length, biological resources, noise and vibration, energy use, and concerns about the adequacy of the Draft and Final EIR to evaluate impacts and identify feasible mitigation measures and to address comments on the environmental documents. CEQA requires analysis of potentially significant impacts against established significance thresholds. All feasible mitigation measures must be applied, rather than all possible mitigation measures, so that the interests of the environment and economy are balanced. Staff has reviewed the environmental documents and the comments received and is of the opinion that the Page 4 City of San Leandro Printed on 9/4/2025