Reso PC22-08 0085 PC Reso Recommending CEQA

Browse Search

Findings and Statements Required by the California Environmental Quality Act Harbor View Project PAGE 41 OF 48 ESA / 170951 Final Environmental Impact Report October 2022 ATTY/RESO.0085/PC RESO RECOMMENDING CEQA – EXHIBIT A REV: 11-02-2022 VR Explanation. Under the “Reduced Building and Building Height” Alternative, impacts related to the intensity of development would be the same as those identified with the Revised Project. The regular Office use floor area, service population, and vehicle trip generation are the same for both scenarios. Therefore, impacts regarding traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, service population, and demand for public services and utilities would be the same as those of the Revised Project. The conservatively significant cumulative air quality impact identified for the Revised Project (Impact AIR-1.CU) (exceeding growth assumptions of the 2017 Clean Air Plan) would continue to occur with the “Reduced Building and Building Height” Alternative since the Office land use program is the same for both scenarios. Similarly, all transportation impacts of the Revised Project would continue to occur under this alternative. This alternative would construct six structures rather than four proposed with the Revised Project. Moreover, each of the buildings under the “Reduced Building and Building Height” Alternative would be lower in height than with the Revised Project, which would therefore reduce the severity of impacts regarding construction activities (air quality and noise) and aesthetics (shadow and light/glare). The only other difference between this alternative and the Revised Project is the proposed amenities building, which would be 23,000 square feet under the alternative and 35,000 square feet with the Project, however this difference does not affect the floor area that drives trip generation; both this alternative and the Revised Project involve the same land uses. As such, this alternative would equally meet each of the objectives of the Revised Project; as the “Reduced Building and Building Height” Alternative was slightly modified to create the Revised Project, it would maintain the overall internal site orientation and clustered development, as well as the provision of recreation or open space amenities, bicycle/pedestrian connections onsite and to Downtown 70/30 Office + Ancillary R&D Lab Alternative Findings. The “70/30 Office + Ancillary R&D Lab” Alternative is described and discussed on pages 5-25 to 5-29 in the DEIR and is summarized relative to the Revised Project in Table 5-2 of the FEIR. All characteristics of this alternative are greater than the Revised Project. So, all of the environmental impacts of the alternative would be more intense than identified for the Revised Project. Therefore, the “70/30 Office + Ancillary R&D Lab” Alternative is hereby rejected from further consideration because it would not reduce or avoid any of the significant effects of the Revised Project, nor would it meet most of the Revised Project’s objectives. Explanation. The regular Office use and amenities building program under the “70/30 Office + Ancillary R&D Lab” Alternative is largely the same as for the Revised Project. It is the introduction of the R&D Lab use that substantially increases the total floor area, service population, and building development compared to the Revised Project. Taken together, the overall intensity and development of the “70/30 Office + Ancillary R&D Lab”