Res07 14769 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

03/27/2007 the City of Redwood City, the applicant, and/or other identified public agencies of responsibility. B. The City Council will adopt and impose the feasible mitigation measures as set forth in the MMRP as enforceable conditions of approval. C. The mitigation measures incorporated into and imposed upon the Project approval will not have new significant environmental impacts that were not analyzed in the FEIR. In the event a mitigation measure recommended in the FEIR has been inadvertently omitted from the conditions of approval or the MMRP, that mitigation measure is adopted and incorporated from the FEIR into the MMRP by reference and adopted as a condition of approval. 6. Findinas Reaardina Alternatives The potential environmental consequences of the proposed Redwood City Downtown Precise Plan have been analyzed in detail for two identified project buildout (M.A.D.) alternatives: (1) the "Maximum Intensity" scenario and (2) the "Moderate Intensity" scenario. The potential buildout characteristics of these two alternatives are described in FEIR section 3.6 (Precise Plan Buildout Alternatives). In addition to the Maximum Intensity and Moderate Intensity project buildouts, the FEIR described and evaluated three alternatives to the original project: (1) Modified Precise Plan-Reduced Height Alternative, (2) No Project-Existing Land Use Policy, and (3) No Project-No Change in Existing Development. Section 15.126.6(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states that, because the EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid significant effects of the proposed project on the environment, "[T]he discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening ay significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly." The City Council certifies that it has independently reviewed and considered the information on alternatives provided in the FEIR and in the record. The FEIR reflects the City Council's independent judgment as to alternatives. The City Council finds that the Project provides the best balance between the Project sponsor's objectives, the City's goals and objectives, the project's benefits as described below in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and mitigation of environmental impacts to the extent feasible. The alternatives proposed and evaluated in the FEIR are rejected for the reasons stated in the FEIR and for the following reasons. Each individual reason presented below constitutes a separate and independent basis to reject the project alternative as being infeasible, and, when the reasons are viewed collectively, provide an overall basis for rejecting the alternative as being infeasible. The CEQA Guidelines state that the "range of potential alternatives to the proposed project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic purposes of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one of more of the significant effects" Atty/Reso/Reso.1683 $ 14769 030707 Muff #613