Laserfiche WebLink
7.1.B. - Page 2 <br /> comparing the environmental impacts with those identified in the certified EIR for the <br /> DTPP. MIG would make a finding indicating consistency with the DTPP EIR for each <br /> project. <br /> Although each project would be reviewed on a time and materials basis, which is to be <br /> paid for out of the applicants cost recovery deposit, this Amendment No. 1 would be <br /> capped at a not-to exceed amount of $200,000 ($100,000 for the original agreement, <br /> plus an additional $100,000 for Amendment No. 1). <br /> ALTERNATIVES <br /> Do not authorize execution of Amendment No. 1 and direct staff to pursue alternate <br /> means of environmental review for Downtown development proposals. <br /> FISCAL IMPACT <br /> Projects submitted under the DTPP are subject to the City's Cost Recovery System. As <br /> a result, any costs, i.e. time and materials, associated with the environmental review of <br /> these projects would be subject to reimbursement via each applicant's deposit. <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW <br /> In 2011 , the City certified an Environmental Impact Report with respect to the adoption <br /> and implementation of the DTPP pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. <br /> This agreement would allow for projects proposed under the rules and regulations of the <br /> DTPP and the mitigation measures identified in the EIR to be evaluated for consistency <br /> and/or further analysis, where necessary. <br /> STEVEN TURNER <br /> PLANNING MANAGER <br /> AARON AKNIN <br /> DIRECTOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT <br /> ROBERT B. BELL <br /> CITY MANAGER <br /> ATTACHMENT <br /> -Amendment <br />