Laserfiche WebLink
<br />98 <br />Page 1 <br /> <br /> <br />February 26, 2007 <br /> <br />Subject <br />Appeal of Final Environmental Impact Report for the Downtown Precise Plan <br /> <br />Recommendation <br />Staff r~commends that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission's certification of <br />the Final Environmental Impact Report, deny the appeal, and make findings to deny the <br />appeal. <br /> <br />Background <br />On February 6,2007, the Planning Commission certified the Final Environmental Impact <br />Report (FEIR) for the Downtown Precise Plan 1. By certifying the FEIR, the Planning <br />Commission made findings that the FEIR conformed to the California Environmental <br />Quality Act (CEQA); that the Planning Commission considered all the information in the <br />FEIR; and that the document reflected the City's independent judgment and analysis. <br /> <br />The EIR concluded that all the environmental impacts identified could be mitigated to less <br />than significant levels except for transportation and circulation, and long-term air <br />emissions. <br /> <br />Following the Planning Commission action, the property owner of 601 Brewster Avenue <br />appealed the certification of the FEIR. See attached letter dated February 12, 2007 <br />(Attachment 1). The appellant's letter includes two exhibits. Exhibit A is the appellant's <br />comment letter on the Draft EIR, dated December 18, 2006. This letter was included as <br />Comment Letter #19 in the Final EI R. Exhibit B is the FEI R response to Comment Letter <br />#19 (pages 3-34 through 3-37 of the FEIR). <br /> <br />Issue of Appeal <br />In general, the issue being appealed is whether the Final EIR is deficient in not having <br />identified as a significant environmental effect the degree of shadowing anticipated to <br />occur along Brewster Avenue, including the subject property, as a result of new height <br />limits proposed by the Draft Downtown Precise Plan. If shadowing is identified as a <br />significant effect, that effect would be subject to mitigation measures and evaluation of <br />alternatives. Following is a discussion of the appellant's arguments and the City's <br />response to those arguments. <br /> <br />1 The FEIR consists of the original Draft EIR, a record of all written and oral comments made at public <br />hearings and received during the public comment period, a list of those commenting, responses to those <br />comments, and text revisions to the Draft ErR. <br />