AgdaPkt 2013-09-09 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

a,7.A. - Page 59 service to the site, replacing all existing inefficient plumbing fixtures and vitreous clay wastewater pipelines, reducing impervious surfaces throughout the site, flood-proofing all buildings, storing storm water in open space and greenway areas rather than on parking lots, and replacing all older buildings with new buildings constructed to meet the latest seismic and engineering standards. The Existing Zoning Alternative would fail to advance the following project objectives: (i) transformation of the development site's existing design to allow development intensity in a manner which implements the New General Plan's vision for land use, urban form and density, economic development, and circulation; and (ii) achievement of project objectives through a comprehensive land use plan. The Existing Zoning Alternative would substantially impair achievement of the following project objectives: (i) redevelopment of the development site for a Stanford University satellite location of sufficient size to accommodate the long-term needs of academic support users; (ii) planning of the campus with sufficient flexibility to allow office, R&D, and medical clinic uses; (iii) redevelopment of the site to conserve natural resources through sustainable land use components and building features; (iv) redevelopment of the site to enhance the quality and value of the adjacent residential neighborhood; (v) redevelopment of the site in a manner which promotes and enhances a healthy and diverse economy in the City; (vi) creation of a pattern of smaller City blocks integrated into the neighborhood-scale street grid; and (vii) provision of a high-quality campus with substantial usable open space. On balance, the environmental benefits that might be achieved with this alternative are outweighed by its environmental impacts compared to the Project, its reduced environmental benefits compared to the Project, its substantial impairment of most project objectives, and its failure to advance two project objectives. The City Council rejects this alternative. Reduced Development/425 Broadway Preservation Scenario Alternative (Alternative 18.3) ("Reduced Development Alternative"). This alternative assumes the same uses as the Project in the same proportions, but would allow only 70% of the square footage of the Project (1.06 million square feet compared to 1.52 million square feet) and a lower FAR (0.7 compared to 1.0). This alternative would also preserve the 425 Broadway building and adjoining plaza with fountains. Significant adverse environmental impacts of the Project that would be reduced by the Reduced Development Alternative are certain traffic, air quality, and cultural and historic resource impacts, as described in the EIR. Some intersection level of service impacts that could be significant and unavoidable under the Project (if other agencies with jurisdiction do not approve mitigation) might be less than significant under the Reduced Development Alternative. The Project's significant unavoidable air quality impacts would likely be reduced to a less than significant level under the Reduced Development Alternative. The potentially significant and unavoidable historic resources impact on the 425 Broadway building and plaza with fountains would be avoided. None of the other significant unavoidable impacts of the Project would be reduced to a less than significant level by the Reduced Development Alternative. The Reduced Development Alternative would slightly increase climate change impacts compared to the Project because its COz-equivalent emissions would be 4.2 metric tons per capita, compared to the Project's 4.1 metric tons; neither the Reduced Development Alternative ATTY/RES0.2901/STANFORD EIR CERTIFICATION REV:08-29-13 VR Page 49 of 56