Laserfiche WebLink
11 <br /> <br />circumstances. The appellant lists the 849 Veterans 90-unit residential development, <br />150 El Camino Real 12-unit residential development, 707 Bradford 117 unit residential <br />development, and 40 Birch Street dental office. <br /> <br />City’s Response: <br />The appellant lists a number of other projects that were also exempted. All of the listed <br />projects, like 353 Main, did not provide below grade parking. Specifically, 707 Bradford <br />and 849 Veterans are in the same flood zone as 353 Main Street and were informed of <br />the same FEMA updates which prohibits below grade parking for residential <br />development. Similar to 353 Main Street, the geotechnical engineer for 707 Bradford <br />and 849 Veterans recommended similar dewatering methods given the projects’ <br />relationship to groundwater. <br /> <br />II. The Project is eligible for the Class 32 “Infill Development Projects” <br />categorical exemption pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 <br />and CEQA Section 15332 <br /> <br />Appellant’s Contention: <br />Based on these assertions, the project is ineligible for the Class 32 exemption and <br />further environmental review is required. <br /> <br />City’s Response: <br />As noted in the report and analysis, the project is not allowed to construct subterranean <br />parking based on the buildings use and FEMAs updated FIRM maps. Therefore the <br />project does not entail substantial grading nor substantial excavation below <br />groundwater. The applicant has provided an updated geotechnical report based on the <br />current proposal which confirms this. <br /> <br />Based on the City’s analysis and supporting evidence, there are no unusual <br />circumstances associated with the project at 353 Main Street and the Class 32 <br />Categorical Exemption for Infill Development was appropriate. <br /> <br />OTHER POINTS RAISED BY APPELLANT: <br />In addition to the points raised in the appeal letter, the appellant also raised the <br />following points in a subsequent email received on March 21, 2108 (see attached): <br /> <br />Appellant’s Contention: <br />The issues BNI has raised in its appeal are absolutely valid because the 2016 soils <br />report says that even if parking is at or above grade, you still cannot put a 7-story <br />7.B. - Page 11