|
<br />Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives
<br />
<br />with respect to Population and Housing, Public Services, Transportation, and Utilities and Service
<br />Systems due to the change in mix of anticipated land 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 />
<br />Findings
<br />
<br />The City hereby fInds that the Higher Intensity Commercial Alternative is infeasible for the following
<br />environmental, economic, social, and other considerations:
<br />
<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 for 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 for 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 />
<br />. Alternative 3: Reduced Project
<br />
<br />This alternative would allow development at a maximum FAR of 1.25 for 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 alternative, there would be no differentiation
<br />between different areas (districts) of the Overlay Zone. Specific development characteristics that would
<br />be allowed under this alternative relative to the proposed Overlay Zone are specified in Table 3-2
<br />(Alternative 3 and Proposed Overlay Zone Characteristics).
<br />
<br />
<br />Alternative 3
<br />
<br />Proposed Overlay Zone
<br />SOURCE: PSS&! 2006
<br />sf = square feet
<br />
<br />Gilll!SFdtinIiaI
<br />-.lkIIs
<br />2,965
<br />5,551
<br />
<br />.7ilIif_
<br />IillolbdWlkIIs
<br />2,965
<br />5,551
<br />
<br />Gilll!S_
<br />otIte
<br />2,387,361 sf
<br />3,410,507 sf
<br />
<br />-
<br />-332,807 sf
<br />690,339 sf
<br />
<br />GitlSSFdtinIiaI
<br />-
<br />819,326 sf
<br />1,275,440 sf
<br />
<br />NetFdtinlial
<br />~
<br />507,172 sf
<br />963,286 sf
<br />
<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 />
<br />Findings
<br />
<br />The City hereby fInds that the Reduced Project Alternative is infeasible for the following environmental,
<br />economic, social, and other considerations:
<br />
<br />Metro East Mixed Use Overlay Zone ErR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
<br />
<br />3-5
<br />
<br />758-71
<br />
|