Laserfiche WebLink
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alter atives <br />vibrant', val able commur ties Kith localized access to amenities, further reducing reliance n the <br />automobile for a varlet y of trips. <br />m Pedestrian-friendly environments and niore compact de-%rel pmcnt patterns in close pr it it y to <br />transit ser%re to support and impr -%,re transit use and ridersEp. Focusing housing and employment <br />growth in transit -- accessible locations through this transit -- oriented developmcnt approach xA iU <br />sel-%Te to reduce auto use and support more multi dal travel beha %ri r. <br />Further, the large reduction in retail space would signifieantl y reduce potential new employment <br />yt ent <br />opportunities and the economic benefits that accompany such opportunities, as compared to the <br />proposed Transit Zoning Code. It would also reduce the a -1 unt of potential tax revenue that the Cite <br />could use to reinvest and stimulate economic development. <br />On balance, reducing the development intensit y by 25 percent under Alternative 2 would not pro -vide any <br />sigr�fieant environmental benefits that outweigh the extent t omrlileh it xlrould inhibit the City's ability to <br />meet rcgi n l housing needs and its goal of establishing a transit-supportive, pedestrian-oriented <br />development franiework t o support the riew transit -in cast- tueture. <br />For these reasons,, the Agency rejects jUternathire 2 as infeasible. <br />M Alternative 3: Low-Rise Project <br />TliLis alternative is a 1 xr- to i -rise version of the "frIfflisit Zoning Code S 84), which miould lin t <br />building heights in the Downtown and Transit Viflage Districts to four stories. Under lternativc 3,, the <br />w t mirn and Transit Village Districts kArould be redeveloped according to the standards of the First <br />Street Corridor District. The remaining districts of the Transit Zoning Code S 4 area v uld be <br />developed consistent x ith the proposed project. This r uld result in 2,049 fe wer residential units and <br />36,000 femirer sf of retail uses. Because this alternatkre xr uld alloxv building heights that are similar to <br />e isdng buildings in the area, the alternative vrould ensure future development vrould ha ve less <br />shade shadow impacts, as well as generate ever autonl bile trips. <br />"I'lie anticipated mix of land uses would therefore be different than the proposed project, and a less <br />residential based area -would result. Specific development charaeterlstics that would b ll ted under this <br />alternative relative: to the proposed Transit Zoning Code S 4 are specified in Table -2 Alternative 3 <br />and Proposed Transit Zoning Cade [SD 841 Characteristics). <br />3-6 Transit Zoning Code ( ) EIR Findings of Faot/Statement of Overriding Considerations <br />