|
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives
<br />with respect to Population and Housing, Public Services, Transportation, and Utilities and Service
<br />Systems due to the change in mix of anticipated ]and uses that would occur within the Overlay Zone.
<br />Impacts with respect to Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology,
<br />Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use, and Noise would result in
<br />impacts similar to the proposed project under this alternative.
<br />Findings
<br />The City hereby fmds that the Higher Intensity Commercial Alternative is infeasible fox the following
<br />environmental, economic, social, and other considerations:
<br />^ Would not create an active, mixed-use urban village where it is possible to live, work, shop and
<br />play all within a short walk of each other to the extent of the proposed project.
<br />^ Would not provide fox a mix of housing in order to encourage a continuum of living and a variety
<br />of household types to the extent of the proposed project.
<br />^ Would not allow fox the development of varied residential types in a mixed-use configuration
<br />including, but not limited to, loft-style units, live/work units, attached row houses, and high-
<br />quality stacked flats to the extent of the proposed project.
<br />^ Alternative 3: Reduced Project
<br />This alternative would allow development at a maximum FAR of 1.25 fox each developable parcel within
<br />the Overlay Zone. The anticipated mix of commercial, office and residential land uses would be identical
<br />to the proposed project, however the potential on-site densities would be reduced to less than half that
<br />of the currently proposed Active Urban district. Under this altemative, there would be no differentiation
<br />between different areas (districts) of the Overlay Zone. Specific development characteristics that would
<br />be allowed under this altemative relative to the proposed Overlay Zone aze specified in Table 3-2
<br />(Alternative 3 and Proposed Overlay Zone Characteristics).
<br />grass ruetwoent>el Grosses GtiossRitar ivetf+
<br />AlesldsrplellAMs Resider~ailh^s~ Ofibe _~~ RefaA !
<br />Alternative 3 2,965 2,965 2,387,361 sf -332,807 sf 819,326 sf 507,172 sf
<br />Proposed Overlay Zone 5,551 5,551 3,410,507 sf 690,339 sf 1,275,440 sf 963.286 sf
<br />sf
<br />feet
<br />Under this alternative, impacts with respect to Air Quality, Noise, Population and Housing, Public
<br />Services, Transportation, and Utilities and Service Systems would be less than the proposed project,
<br />while impacts related to Aesthetics, Land Use and Planning, Noise, and Population and Housing would
<br />be similar in nature and scale to the proposed General Plan Update.
<br />Findings
<br />The City hereby fmds that the Reduced Project Alternative is infeasible fox the following environmental,
<br />economic, social, and other considerations:
<br />Metro East Mixed Use Overlay Zone EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-5
<br />75B-71
<br />
|