My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2011-01-24
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
AgdaPkt 2011-01-24
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/13/2012 12:57:48 PM
Creation date
1/20/2011 5:18:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
1/24/2011
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
541
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
8.0 <br /> Ex�i�A� <br /> available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such <br /> projects. When a lead agency finds, even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation <br /> measures, that a project will still cause one or more significant environmental effects <br /> that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided, it must, prior to approving the project <br /> as rnitigated, first determine whether there are any project atternatives that are feasible <br /> and that would substantially lessen or avoid the project's significant impacts. Under <br /> CEQA, "feasibility" includes "desirability" to the extent that it is based on a reasonable <br /> balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors, and <br /> an alternative may be deemed by the lead agency to be "infeasible" if it fails to <br /> adequately promote the lead agency's underlying goals and objectives for the project. <br /> Thus, a lead agency may reject an alternative, even if it would avoid or substantially � <br /> lessen one or more significant environmental effects of the project, if it finds that the <br /> alternative's failure to adequately achieve the City's goals and objectives for the project, <br /> or other specific and identifiable considerations, make the alternative infeasible. <br /> A. City's Goals and Objectives for the Project. <br /> The Cit has identified sixteen s ecific oals and ob'ectives for the Pro'ect See <br /> Y P g J J � <br /> Draf[ EIR at pages 3-5 to 3-7): <br /> 1. Establish new land use and development regulations that will produce a <br /> unique and robust Downtown within the context of a rich, historic and valued <br /> built environment. I <br /> 2. Create a well-designed, pedestrian-friendly, and financially viable historic <br /> Downtown. <br /> 3. Provide for the expansion of city housing choices by encouraging <br /> compact, transit-accessible, pedestrian-oriented housing and mixed use <br /> (commercial/housing) development within the DPP area in densities greater than ', <br /> currently permitted. ', <br /> 4. Facilitate public and private investment in the DPP area. I <br /> 5. Restore Downtown Redwood City as the indispensible hub where a mix of <br /> diverse services, conveniences, experiences, and lifestyle choices are provided in <br /> a way that preserves Downtown's rich supply of historic resources while <br /> remaining appropriate to the social and economic conditions of life in the 21 <br /> Century. <br /> 6. Create a visually appealing and memorable Downtown by setting clear <br /> and detailed standards for quality design in the reuse and restoration of historic <br /> buildings and spaces, and the careful design and construction of new buildings. <br /> 7. Actively encourage and promote the preservation of Redwood City's <br /> historic resources to the greatest degree feasible. <br /> S:U2ESOLU'I'IONS1Reso. 2092 CFQt1 Findines f'or DPP Exhihit B.doc 47 <br /> 012011 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.