|
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives
<br />viability, LE -4.3, 4.4, and 4.5, which support the goal of protecting and enhancing developments sites
<br />and districts which are unique community assets that enhance the quality of life, or LE -5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.7,
<br />5.9, 5.10, and 5.11, which ensure that the impacts of development are mitigated to the same extent as the
<br />proposed Transit Zoning Code. (See Land Use Element; Draft EIR Table 4.7 -3.) Similarly, it would not
<br />further the goals of the Urban Design Element (Goals 1 -7) to the same extent as the proposed Transit
<br />Zoning Code. (See Urban Design Element; Draft EIR Table 4.7 -3.) Moreover, the integrated and
<br />cohesive development standards that are proposed for the Transit Zoning Code area would not be
<br />implemented.
<br />Lastly, Alternative 1 would increase impacts on transportation as a result of lack of emphasis on
<br />alternative modes of transportation in the current General Plan and zoning designations and the lack of a
<br />development framework to support transit - oriented development. For these reasons, the Agency rejects
<br />Alternative 1 as infeasible.
<br />■ Alternative 2: Overall Reduced Density
<br />The Overall Reduced Density Alternative would reduce the intensity of all anticipated land uses within
<br />the Transit Zoning Code (SD 84) area by 25 percent. In general, this alternative would reduce the
<br />number of residences, including affordable housing, and reduce employment opportunities as a result of
<br />less commercial uses in the area. Specifically, this alternative would result in approximately 1,019 fewer
<br />residential units, and 96,750 fewer square feet of retail within the Transit Zoning Code (SD 84) area.
<br />Specific development characteristics that would be allowed under this alternative relative to the proposed
<br />Transit Zoning Code (SD 84) are specified in Table 3 -1 (Alternative 2 and Proposed Transit Zoning
<br />Code [SD 84] Characteristics).
<br />Table 3-1 Alternative
<br />Land Use Type
<br />2 and Proposed
<br />Attemative 2
<br />Transit Zoning Code (SD 84) Characteristics
<br />Transit Zoning Code (SD 84)
<br />Werence
<br />Residential (units)
<br />3,056
<br />4,075
<br />(1,019)
<br />Retail (so
<br />290,250
<br />387,000
<br />(96,750)
<br />Industrial (so
<br />(990,000)
<br />(990,000)
<br />0
<br />Commercial (so
<br />(124,000)
<br />(124,000)
<br />0
<br />Civic (so
<br />(21,000)
<br />(21,000)
<br />0
<br />Green (so
<br />680,000
<br />680,000
<br />0
<br />Parking
<br />(1,772,000)
<br />(1,772,000)
<br />0
<br />SOURCE: PBS &J 2010
<br />Findings
<br />The Agency hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
<br />make the adoption of this alternative infeasible.
<br />Although Alternative 2 would somewhat reduce the significant impacts of the proposed Transit Zoning
<br />Code (SD 84) on aesthetics, climate change, and transportation, it would not reduce any of those impacts
<br />3 -4 Revised Station District Project and FOL Settlement Agreement Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding
<br />8OA -1 77 Considerations
<br />
|