2007-026 - Approving the Final Environmental Impact

Home Browse Search

Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives . Would not create an active, mixed-use urban village where it is possible to live, work, shop and play all within a short walk of each other to the extent of the proposed project. . Would not achieve the harmonious integration of new mixed-use development within the existing fabric of the mid-rise and high-rise office environment due to the reduced development illtensity compared to the proposed project. . Would not create a differentiation between different areas of the Overlay Zone. . Would not provide for a mix of housing in order to encourage a continuum of living and a variety of household types to the extent of the proposed project. . Would not facilitate project designs that encourage adequate amounts of retail or commercta.! space to service residents and/or employees within the development and the larger Overlay Zone. . Would not allow for the development of varied residential types ill a mixed-use configuration illcluding, but not limited to, loft-style units, live/work units, attached row houses, and high- quality stacked flats to the extent of the proposed project. 3.4.2 First and Cabrillo Towers Alternatives (Project-Level) As shown below and ill Chapter 5 (Alternatives) of the Volume 2 of the Draft EIR, three alternatives were evaluated ill comparison to the First and Cabrillo Towers development. The environmental advantages and disadvantages of each of these alternatives are described. The alternatives that were selected for analysis include: . Alternative I-No Project/No Development: Under this alternative, no changes to the proposed project site would occur. Physical conditions at the site would remain in their current state. . Alternative 2-No Project/Development Under Existing General Plan: Under this alternative, the proposed mixed use development would not be constructed. Rather, the project site would be developed in a manner consistent with its existing zoning and General Plan land use designation. This alternative provides an analysis of the type of development and impacts that would be expected to occur if the site were used solely for commercial purposes, and did not include any mixed uses. . Alternative 3-Reduced Residential Component: This alternative would involve construction of a smaller mixed use development on the project site. This alternative would construct the buildings ill the same location as under the proposed project, and maintain the ground floor use as commercial; however the height of each residential tower would be reduced to a maximum of 19 stories each. This would reduce the total FAR of the property from a 2.7 FAR under the proposed project, to a 2.5 FAR under this alternative, which is the minimum envisioned FAR in the Active Urban district under the proposed Overlay Zone. With a reduced height limit, the number of residential units would also be reduced from 374 to approximately 335. . Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Evaluation As the proposed project is restricted, ill terms of location, to an area within the Overlay Zone, an alternative site would not be appropriate as an alternative to the proposed project. The number of alternative sites that could be selected within the Overlay Zone would be limited and restricted to those areas within the 200+ acre program area. No identifiable difference or benefit ill terms of environmental impacts is anticipated. Other land uses such as all residential for all new or redevelopment would not achieve the objectives of the proposed project and the Overlay Zone and could result in incompatibility P9'iQI,tti,...,n ~I,..., ?nn7_n?R 3-6 Page 58 of 61lletro East Mixed Use Overlay Zone EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations