Res20 15907 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

11/16/2020 Impact CR -1: The project would result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Impact CR -4: The project, combined with cumulative development, including past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development, could result in a significant adverse cumulative cultural resources impact. Through the environmental review process, the City identified the following five (5) potential Project alternatives for consideration: Alternative Location. Although initially considered as a potential Project alternative, development of an alternative site was rejected as infeasible during the EIR scoping process, because an alternative location has not been identified that would meet most of the applicant's and City's project objectives, several of which are specific to the project site and vicinity. It is uncertain whether an alternative location would reduce or avoid any of the other impacts identified for the Project and the feasibility of obtaining other similar sites. See DEIR page 5-3. Therefore, this alternative was not evaluated in the EIR. Reduced Office Alternative. An alternative that would have included development of a reduced square footage of office uses was considered during the EIR scoping process. This alternative was rejected because it would not provide a substantial reduction or avoidance of significant impacts identified for the Project. In addition, a reduction in office space would reduce the financial returns of the project and thus the ability of the project to provide the community benefits (e.g., open space, childcare, affordable housing). As a result, the Reduced Office Alternative would not achieve the related project objectives for community benefits to the same degree as the Project. See DEIR page 5-3. Therefore, this alternative was not evaluated in the EIR. No Project Alternative. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e) requires that an EIR analyze a "No Project" alternative. The purpose of describing and analyzing a no project alternative is to allow decision -makers to compare the impacts of approving the project with the impacts of not approving the project. The No Project Alternative was evaluated in the DEIR (see DEIR pages 5-4 through 5-6). Preservation Alternative. The Preservation Alternative would be constructed on the same development parcels as the Project, and its development program would be identical to that of the Project (i.e., same number of multi -family residential units, same square footage of retail and office space, and same amount of public and private open space). However, under the Preservation Alternative, Perry's Feed Shed would be rehabilitated and repurposed for retail use; under the Project, this structure would instead be demolished and a replacement structure accommodating retail use would be constructed in its place. The Preservation Alternative was evaluated in the DEIR (see DEIR pages 5-6 through 5-8). 2018 Project Alternative. The 2018 Project Alternative would develop 249 fewer ATTY/RESO.0118/PC RESO SOUTH MAIN MIXED -USED PROJECT REV: 11-03-2020 PR Page 27 of 32 RESO. NO. 15907 MUFF NO. 601