Reso11 PC 11-07 December 13 2011

Browse Search

proximity to transit, employment opportunities, and shopping and services to improve the pedestrian and bicycle experience along El Camino Deal; to promote the Grand Boulevard Initiative; and to improve the City's jobs /housing balance. (See Draft EIF , Section 1.3 p. 1 and Section 7.B pp. 197 -109 c. Redesign ign Alternative No. 2 would also avoid the potentially significant and unavoidable impact relating to the Ions of the Mel's Bowl sign by redesigning the project to increase the setback from the El Camino Real sidewalk. This alternative is different from Redesign ign Alternative No. 1 in that it would provide for the parking garage to be constructed belo w ground level, thereby allowing the development of the same number of residential units (1 41 units) as the proposed project, not withstanding the increased setbacks. However, thi alternative is also rejected as infeasible because it would also be inconsistent with City policies regarding urban design and pedestrian oriented development generally, development along El Camino Real in particular, and the Grand Boulevard Initiative (See General Plan policies BE1.7, BE11.O and BE12.3, pp. BE- 2, BE-68 and BE -69. In addition, and independent of the foregoing, the City rejects this alternative because it would not meet the City's and the applicant's project objectives to the same degree as the proposed project, including objectives to improve the pedestrian and bicycle experience along El Camino Deal; and to promote the Grand Boulevard Initiative. (See draft EI, Section 1.3 p.1 and Section 7.13 pp.1 9. 8. Statement of Overriding Consideration: As described in Section 4.7 of the Final EI p. 56-63 of the Draft EIF , the Project may have a significant and unavoidable impact on the historic Mel's Bo wl pole sign, a Cultural Resource, urce, in that said pole sign may be demolished. Although the mitigation measures approved and adopted include all feasible measures to mitigate the significant effects of removal of the sign (see Section 4.7.4, pp. 62 -3 of the Draft EIF, its removal from the project site may nonetheless result in a significant and unavoidable effect relating to Cultural Resources. in accordance with CE QA Guidelines Section 15093, the Planning Commission has, in determining whether or not to approve the Project, balanced the economic, social, technological, and other project benefits against this unavoidable environmental risk, and finds that each of the benefits of the Project set forth below outweighs the significant adverse environmental effects that are not mitigated to less- than-significant levels. This statement of overriding considerations is based on the Planning Commission's review of the Final EIR and other information in the administrative trative record. Each of the benefits identified belo w provides a separate and independent basis for overriding the significant environmental effects of the Project. The benefits of the Project are as follows: ATTY/R E SO. 2179/ATTAC H M ENT 1 R ESO CE F TI FYI N G FINAL E I R 2580 E I REV Page 5 of 7