2010-002 CRA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Profect Alternatives uses, without which the existing transit system cannot fully realize its potential for accommodating additional trips and relieving the transportation system. These nodes along the corridor also create vibrant, walkable communities with localized access to amenities, further reducing reliance on the automobile for a variety of trips. ~ Pedestrian-friendly environments and more compact development patterns in close proximity to transit serve to support and improve transit use and ridership. Focusing housing and employment growth in transit-accessible locations through this transit-oriented development approach will serve to reduce auto use and support more multimodal travel behavior. Further, the large reduction in retail space would significantly reduce potential new employment opportunities and the economic benefits that accompany such opportunities, as compared to the proposed Transit Zoi~iig Code. It would also reduce the amount of potential tax revenue that the City could use to reinvest and stimulate economic development. On balance, reducing the development intensity by 25 percent under Alternative 2 would not provide any significant environmental benefits that outweigh the extent to which it would inhibit the City's ability to meet regional housing needs and its goal of establishing a transit-supportive, pedestrian-oriented development framework to support the new transit-infrastructure. For these reasons, the Agency rejects Alternative 2 as infeasible. ~ Alternative 3: Low-Rise Project This alternative is a low- to mid-rise version of the Transit Zoning Code (SD 84A and SD 84B), which would limit building heights in the Downtown and Transit Village Districts to four stories. Under Alternative 3, the Downtown and Transit Village Districts would be redeveloped according to the standards of the First Street Corridor District The remaining districts of the Transit Zoning Code (SD 84A and SD 84B) area would be developed consistent with the proposed project. This would result in 2,049 fewer residential units and 36,000 fewer sf of retail uses. Because this alternative would allow building heights that are similar to existing buildings in the area, the alternative would ensure future development would have less shade/shadow impacts, as well as generate fewer automobile trips. The anticipated mix of land uses would therefore be different than the proposed project, and a less residential based area would result. Specific development characteristics that would be allowed under this alternative relative to the proposed Transit Zoning Code (SD 84A and SD 84B) are specified in Table 3-2 (Alternative 3 and Proposed Transit Zoning Code [SD 84A and SD 84B] Characteristics). 3-6 Transit Zoning Code (SD 84) EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations