Laserfiche WebLink
<br />23 <br />standard for City Streets (DTPP p. 59, "Public Frontage Regulations Chart"). According to project component plans, <br />the project component proposes to install new single head street lighting fixtures as follows: three along the Broadway <br />frontage, three along Marshall Street, and four along Walnut Street; in addition, four new twin acorn style lighting <br />fixtures along Main Street (Plan Sheet LT1, 11/9/23). These fixtures would be in compliance with Lighting Zone 3 <br />and Title 24 standards and would thereby minimize the impact of new sources of light pollution and not create a new <br />source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. For these reasons, <br />the 1900 Broadway project component would have a less than significant impact, and is consistent with the analysis <br />in the EIR/SEIR because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of <br />substantial importance for CEQA purposes. <br />e. For the Downtown Precise Plan program EIR (pp. 6-13 and 6-14), the City determined that any new structure within <br />the DTPP area that would cause identified shadow-sensitive uses and spaces to be more than 50 percent in shadow at <br />12:00 PM (noon) on the Spring Equinox (March 20) would impair the livability and beneficial uses of those shadow- <br />sensitive uses and spaces, in which case a significant environmental impact would result. <br /> The City conducted extensive and detailed studies regarding the potential shadow impacts that might result from the <br />Downtown’s expected increases in building heights (DTPP program EIR Appendix 21.3 - Supplemental Shadow <br />Analysis Information). As a result, the DTPP development standards were developed with the specific intent to avoid <br />significant shadow impacts (EIR p. 6-29). Full buildout of the DTPP to the maximum building envelopes allowed by <br />the Plan’s standards would not cause any shadow-sensitive uses and spaces to be more than 50 percent in shadow at <br />noon on the Spring Equinox. The impact of the DTPP was considered to be less than significant, and no mitigations <br />were needed. <br /> The DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR (pp. 6-13 through 6-14) generally concurred with the DTPP EIR <br />conclusion but determined that because development under the amended DTPP would be expected to increase, <br />exceptions to height stepdown requirements or side setback requirements could be granted that might result in <br />potentially significant impacts. Therefore, the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR (p. 6-14) included <br />Mitigation Measure AE-5 (“Shadow Study for Exceptions to Building Placement and/or Building Height and <br />Disposition Regulations”), which would require projects seeking exceptions to DTPP regulations pertaining to <br />building placement and/or building height and disposition to demonstrate to City Staff that the exceptions would be <br />consistent with the DTPP (section 2.7.5) and would not result in shadow exceeding 50 percent on the shadow-sensitive <br />uses and spaces at noon on the Spring Equinox. The SEIR concluded that this mitigation measure would reduce the <br />potential impacts related to shadow to a less-than-significant level. <br />To address the DTPP shadow standard, the project component applicant provided a shadow study (“solar study”) that <br />simulated project-generated shadows throughout the day for the Spring Equinox, Summer Solstice, Fall Equinox, and <br />Winter Solstice (see Plan Sheet A13, 11/9/23). As discussed in the project description (item #8 above), maximum <br />project component building heights would not exceed 92’ at the parapet (seven stories) plus an additional allowed 10’ <br />for the rooftop mechanical/penthouse screening, totaling a maximum building height of 102’ with the following step- <br />down heights consistent with the DTPP : (1) along the Main Street frontage, consistent with the DTPP-required 35’ <br />setback along Main Street, building heights would be 34’ (three stories, consistent with the DTPP-required stepdown <br />zone) along the approximately 145’-building portion from Marshall Street south to the public common area; and (2) <br />along the Broadway frontage, and extending approximately 46’ consistent with the DTPP-required 35’ setback along <br />Broadway, buildings would be 34’ tall (three stories, consistent with the DTPP-required stepdown zone) along the <br />approximately 150’-building portion from Walnut Street west to the public common area. As also indicated in the <br />project component plans, these maximum building heights would allow for variations in building articulation to allow <br />for building elements such as rooftop terraces and balconies (Plan Sheets A4, A8, A9, A10.1, A10.2, A11.1, and E9, <br />11/9/23). The study showed that shadows would not cause any shadow-sensitive uses to be more than 50 percent in <br />shadow at noon on the Spring Equinox. Shadows would generally extend northward (with eastern and western parts <br />depending on time of day, but would not extend beyond Marshall Street and some parts of Main Street or Walnut <br />Street depending on time of day, except for the winter period (October through January). Then, shadow would extend <br />across Marshall Street and some parts of Main Street or Walnut Street depending on time of day. Also, no shadows <br />would be cast on any portion of the Main Street Historic District, which is south of the project component site. Because <br />the shadow study showed that shadows from the proposed project component would not cause any shadow-sensitive <br />uses to be more than 50 percent in shadow at noon on the Spring Equinox, and the proposed project components would <br />be in compliance with all applicable DTPP standards regarding shadows, no additional shadow impacts would be <br />anticipated. The 1900 Broadway project component would have a less than significant impact for the reasons noted. <br />Therefore, the 1900 Broadway project component would be consistent with the analysis in the EIR/SEIR and would <br />not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA <br />purposes. <br />ATTY/RESO.0074/CC RESO 847 WOODSIDE (CEQA) - EXHIBIT 1 - CEQA CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST <br />REV: 10-23-24 VR <br /> <br />Page 23 of 135