Laserfiche WebLink
25 <br /> <br />In sum, the traffic analysis demonstrates that Project-related traffic remains within the <br />projections performed with respect to the DTPP, and there are no new significant <br />impacts or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant <br />impacts. <br /> <br />iv. Further CEQA Analysis for Building Height, Setback, and Historic <br />Resource Impacts is Not Required <br /> <br />Appellants’ Contentions: The DTPP EIR envisioned a four story maximum height zone <br />for the block on which the Project is proposed; the EIR envisioned “tower wall step <br />backs” and “relational height” provisions for street frontages that would promote visually <br />appropriate setbacks to diminish relational height discrepancies; that the Project <br />violates the EIR because it does not enhance or preserve the “architectural character, <br />historic character and human scale of the district” to which it is immediately adjacent; <br />that it is not compatible with “recognized boundaries of landmark districts and on the <br />sites outside and immediately adjacent to those boundaries;” and that it does not <br />“preserve and enhance visible reminders of the city’s historic and architectural heritage <br />and its fringes” nor does it integrate these landmarks into the urban design of the <br />downtown. (See Carr, Yeley and Associates Appeal, pp. 1, 9) <br /> <br />City Response: As discussed earlier in this report, the Project site is located fully within <br />an 8-story building height zone. The DTPP EIR studied building heights for their <br />potential to create shadow impacts, impacts to historic streets, aesthetic impacts on <br />historic resources (especially where resources are clustered), and impacts to low-rise <br />historic neighborhoods adjacent to the DTPP area. As a result, it was determined that <br />building heights needed to be reduced in some areas below the typical 8 to 12-story <br />maximum. These areas are indicated on the DTPP Height Regulations map on page 13 <br />of this staff report, and page 86 of the DTPP. No building height reductions or building <br />wall step backs are required on the Project site. <br /> <br />As for the Appellants’ claims that the Project is incompatible with and does not enhance <br />or preserve the character and scale of the district to which it is adjacent, as also <br />previously noted in this report, the Project site is not located adjacent to any district(s), <br />historic or otherwise. Finally, with respect to the Appellants’ statement that the Project <br />does not “preserve and enhance visible reminders of the city’s historic and architectural <br />heritage and its fringes” and it does not integrate these landmarks into the urban design <br />of the downtown, the DTPP EIR placed a high degree of focus on analyzing potential <br />impacts to the historic structures and character of downtown. The DTPP’s mandatory <br />front setback, building height regulations, historic parcelization, and historic architectural <br />character regulations were purposely crafted to keep new development on non-historic <br />8.C. - Page 25