Laserfiche WebLink
7.A. - Page 20 <br /> • The Exposed Surface Parking is not in an area highly visible to large volumes of auto traffic or <br /> pedestrians. <br /> • The Exposed Surface Parking will be in place for no longer than three years. <br /> • The Exposed Surface Parking is necessary to facilitate construction of a development project within the <br /> Downtown Precise Plan area. <br /> • The Exposed Surface Parking will not occupy more than 35% of the frontage of the affected block face. <br /> • The sidewalk will be buffered from the Exposed Surface Parking by a decorative wall or fence in <br /> accordance with Section 2.5.4. <br /> • In no event shall the Exposed Surface Parking be used to meet the required number of parking spaces as <br /> identified in the Parking Regulations Chart. <br /> With the incorporation of the aforementioned findings and the fact that exposed surface parking is consistent with <br /> existing land uses, it is not anticipated to result in arry significant aesthetic environmental impacts. <br /> d. The Downtown Precise Plan EIR (pp. 6-28 and 6-29) concluded that since new development within the DTPP area <br /> would be required to meet the lighting power allowances for Lighting Zone 3 for new installed outdoor lighting <br /> equipment contained in Title 24, Parts 1 and 6, Building Energy Efficiency Standards, unnecessary brightness of <br /> lighting, debilitating glare, and sky glow would be adequately controlled. The impact of development occurring <br /> under the DTPP was considered to be less than significant, and no mitigations were required. The proposedproject <br /> is in compliance with all applicable DTPP regulations, and as a result, no additional light and glare impacts are <br /> anticipated. The proposed amendments to the DTPP would not alter the lighting requirement or result in the <br /> generation of arry new lighting sources; therefore no additional light and glare impacts are anticipated. <br /> e. For the Downtown Precise Plan EIR (pp. 6-13 and 6-14), the City determined that arry new structure within the <br /> DTPP area that would cause identified shadow-sensitive uses and spaces to be more than 50 percent in shadow at <br /> 12:00 P.M. (noon) on the Spring Equinox (March 20) would impair the livability and beneficial uses of those <br /> shadow-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 (EIR Appendix 21.3 — Supplemental Shadow Analysis <br /> Information). As a result, the DTPP development regulations 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 regulations would not cause arry shadow-sensitive uses and spaces to be more than 50percent in shadow <br /> at noon on the Spring Equinox. The impact of the DTPP was considered to be less than significant, and no <br /> mitigations were required. Amendments to the DTPP would not result in arry new development that would alter the <br /> shadow analysis prepared for the DTPP EIR. Furthermore, the newly defined Depot Plaza has been added to the <br /> list of Shadow Sensitive Public Open Spaces as referenced on the HeightMap; thus no impacts are anticipated with <br /> the Plan Amendments. The proposed project is in compliance with all applicable DTPP regulations, and as a result, <br /> no additional shadow impacts are anticipated. <br /> Summary of Impacts <br /> Potentially Less than Significant Less than <br /> Significant With Mitigation Significant No <br /> Im act Incor orated Im act Im act <br /> IL AGRICULTURE RESOURCES --Would the project: <br /> a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide X <br /> Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the <br /> Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources <br /> Agency, to non-agricultural use? <br /> b) Conflict with e�sting zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act X <br /> contract? <br /> c) Involve other changes in the e�sting environment which, due to their location X <br /> or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? <br /> Documentation <br /> 11 <br />