Laserfiche WebLink
The impacts of the Open Space Alternative would be slightly less than those of the <br />preferred project. The Open Space Alternative would have slightly fewer water supply, <br />water quality, visual, noise, air quality, and traffic impacts, and would likely create more <br />opportunities for wildlife habitat than the preferred project. <br />The No Project (No Build) Alternative is considered a no project alternative, and CEQA <br />requires the identification of an alternative other than the No Project Alternative as the <br />environmentally superior alternative (see CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6(e)(2)). <br />As explained on Draft SEIR page 123 and EIR pages 5-50-51, the Open Space <br />Alternative would result in slightly fewer impacts than the preferred project, the <br />proposed project, the Ice Center Alternative, and the Existing Specific Plan Alternative. <br />Therefore, the Open Space Alternative would be considered environmentally superior to <br />the preferred project and to the other alternatives. <br />FINDINGS DEMONSTRATING WHY RECIRCULATION IS NOT REQUIRED <br />CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 requires a lead agency to recirculate an EIR for <br />further review and comment when significant new information is added to the EIR after <br />public notice is given of the availability of the Draft EIR but before certification. New <br />information includes: (i) changes to the project; (ii) changes in the environmental setting; <br />or (iii) additional data or other information. Section 15088.5 further provides that "[n]ew <br />information added to an EIR is not 'significant' unless the EIR is changed in a way that <br />deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse <br />environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect <br />(including a feasible project alternative) that the project's proponents have declined to <br />implement." <br />Approval of the preferred project and the minor refinements thereto as presented in the <br />Final SEIR would not result in any new significant environmental impacts or <br />substantially more severe environmental impacts than as set forth in the Draft SEIR. <br />Accordingly, recirculation of the SEIR is not required in light of these project <br />refinements. <br />Having reviewed the information contained in the Draft and Final EIRs, and Draft and <br />Final SEIRs and in the administrative record as well as the requirements under CEQA <br />Guidelines Section 15088.5 and interpretive judicial authority regarding recirculation of <br />draft EIRs, the City hereby finds that no new significant information was added to the <br />SEIR following public review, and thus recirculation of the SEIR is not required by <br />CEQA. <br />FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE EIR <br />AS SUPPLEMENTED BY THE SEIR <br />This section presents the preferred project's significant environmental impacts and <br />feasible mitigation measures. Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 <br />California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and Section 21081 of the Public Resources <br />17 <br />Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations <br />