2024-053 - Final Supplemental for The Related Bristol Specific Plan Project

Home Browse Search

the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project at another location." Given the size and nature of the proposed Project and the Project objectives, it would be infeasible to develop and operate the proposed Project on an alternative site with fewer environmental impacts, while also implementing the City's GPU. Therefore, the Alternative Site Alternative was rejected from further consideration on the following grounds, each of which individually provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative: (1) the alternative does not avoid any significant and unavoidable impact, (2) the alternative would likely not further reduce any of the proposed project's significant impacts; and (3) the alternative is technically, financially, and legally infeasible given the size and nature of the proposed project. This alternative is therefore eliminated from further consideration (Draft Supplemental EIR, pp. 6-4 through 6-5). No Project/Buildout of Existing General Plan Designation. Buildout of the Project site at the maximum allowable density pursuant to the City's General Plan DC-5 land use designation was eliminated from further consideration. The DC-5 land use designation allows for development of the Project site at a maximum 125 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) and a FAR of 5.0, which would allow for development of up to 8,733,780 SF of mixed uses, inclusive of residential uses. The proposed Project would result in approximately 91 du/ac and a FAR of 2.7. The No Project/Buildout of Existing General Plan Designation Alternative would result in an 85 percent intensification of uses onsite in comparison to the proposed Project. This alternative would require demolition of the same structures, require similar mitigation, and would increase air quality emissions and require more parkland in comparison to the proposed Project. Given the increased intensity of the No Project/Buildout of the Existing General Plan Designation Alternative, it would not result in fewer environmental impacts than the proposed Project. Therefore, the No Project/Buildout of Existing General Plan Designation Alternative was rejected from further consideration on the following grounds, each of which individually provides sufficient justification for rejection of this alternative: (1) the alternative does not avoid any significant and unavoidable impact, and (2) the alternative would likely not further reduce any of the proposed project's significant impacts (Draft Supplemental EIR, p. 6-5 ). Description of Alternatives Alternative 1 — No Project/No Build Alternative Pursuant to Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR is required to "discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time the environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services." Therefore, under this alternative, no development would occur on the Project site and it would remain in its existing condition with three existing buildings with 16 existing buildings totaling 465,063 SF functioning as a shopping center. in this alternative scenario, the 16 buildings are assumed to be fully operational as a shopping center with restaurants, a supermarket, banks, a dry cleaner, medical and dental offices, financial offices, and fitness uses. Hence, this alternative compares the impacts of the proposed Project with the existing buildings operating at full capacity for shopping center uses (Draft Supplemental EIR, pp. 6-6 through 6-13).