My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
89-100
Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
1952 - 1999
>
1989
>
89-100
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/28/2015 2:10:04 PM
Creation date
6/26/2003 10:46:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Resolution
Doc #
89-100
Date
10/16/1989
Document Relationships
89-101
(Amended By)
Path:
\Resolutions\CITY COUNCIL\1952 - 1999\1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
O8O <br /> <br /> (f) Due to the redUced Size of this <br />alternative, the envirormental, economic, Social and other <br />benefits of the Project would be obtained t6 a lesser degree. <br /> <br /> D. 2.5 FAR Alternative. :, <br /> <br /> (1) Facts. As described on, pages 6-14 through <br />6-20 of the Draft EIR, the 2.5 FAR Alternative would provide <br />for 625,000 square feet of office space and~36,200 square feet <br />of commercial space on the Project Site, representing a <br /> <br />20 percent reduction in square.footage co~pared to the proposed <br />Project. Many impacts of this alternative are similar to the <br />impacts of the Project, and traffic impacts and air quality <br />impacts would be cumulatively significant pursuant to this <br />alternative. Like the proposed Project, this alternative is <br />consistent with existing zoning and plan designations and would <br />displace the existing office uses on the Project Site. This <br />alternative will slightly reduce the visual and aesthetic <br />impacts of the Project, resulting in significant impacts. The <br />impact on public services and utilities would be similar to the <br />proposed Project in several instances, although the demand for <br />certain services would be reduced due to the smaller siz~ of <br />this Project. <br /> <br /> (2) Findings. This City Council finds that the <br />2.5 FAR Alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the <br />Project, and rejects the 2.5 FAR Alternative, for the following <br /> <br />reasons: <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.