AgdaPkt 2019-02-11 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.C. - Page 5 of 11 Project Alternatives. The Draft EIR evaluates the proposed project against six alternatives, summarized below. Of these, the "No Project — Existing Zoning" and "No Project -Existing General Plan Alternative" are the environmentally superior alternatives as they both reduce peak -hour traffic trips. However, since they are both considered "No Project" alternatives, CEQA requires another alternative to be identified. The "Reduced Buildout and Height Alternative" is considered the CEQA-required environmentally superior alternative. Compared to the proposed project, the Reduced Buildout and Height Alternative would have the greatest reduction in environmental effects. 1. No Project - Existing General Plan (light industrial/building materials use). This alternative represents development that could likely occur on the site pursuant to the natural course of growth under the existing Redwood City General Plan: 884,704 square feet of light industrial and building materials uses. 2. No Project - Existing Zoning (70/30 Research and Development Lab and Ancillary R&D office). This alternative represents development that could likely occur on the site pursuant to the natural course of growth under the existing IR zoning designation to the extent currently allowed by the General Plan: development of 70% R&D Laboratory (578,076 square feet) and 30% R&D Office (247,747 square feet). 3. Reduced Buildout and Building Height. This alternative represents development of approximately 67% of the square footage of the proposed project, with reduced building heights: 788,150 square feet of office. 4. 70/30 Office plus Ancillary R&D Lab. This alternative represents development that allows more square footage of regular office use (70%) combined with less R&D Lab use (30%) than is allowed by the existing IR zoning designation: total floor area of 1,179,748 of mixed offices and R&D uses. 5. Alternative Site Location. This alternative would develop the proposed project development, but at a location within Redwood City other than the proposed project site. The analysis assumes a location within the Seaport Boulevard corridor given the lack of feasible sites elsewhere in the City 6. On-site public amenities. This alternative responds to comments received during scoping of the EIR. This alternative represents development similar to the Project, except with three office buildings (instead of four) to accommodate a range of one to four publicly -accessible, adult soccer fields onsite on one to four acres of the site. Statement of Overriding Considerations. CEQA guidelines (section 15043) provides public agencies the authority to approve projects even though the project would cause a significant effect on the environment if the agency makes a fully informed and publicly disclosed decision that: a. There is no feasible way to lessen or avoid the significant effect; and b. Specifically identified expected public benefits from the project outweigh the significant environmental impacts of the project. The term "public benefits" is not defined, however, it generally is considered the intrinsic value of the development itself and/or the value of any special benefits that the developer is proposing in conjunction City of Redwood City 1017 Middlefield Road, Redwood City, CA. 94063 Tel: 650-780-7000 www.redwoodcity.ore 232