Resolution 12070CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.12070
CERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (IS-90-13) AT FOUR
CIVIC CENTER SITES FOR THE PROPOSED NEW MAIN LIBRARY AND ASSOCIATED
IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the City of Alameda has
considered the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR)
regarding a proposal to construct a new main library building at
the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Oak Street with
associated parking facilities at one or more of three alternative
sites, and the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of the Carnegie
building at 2264 Santa Clara Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft
EIR) dated October 18, 1990 was submitted to the State
Clearinghouse for comment by State agencies (State Clearinghouse
No. 90030601) on October 18, 1990, and was circulated for public
comment between the dates of October 19, 1990 and December 3, 1990
in accordance with CEQA and the City of Alameda EIR Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing and
accepted testimony on the Draft EIR on November 15, 1990, and
accepted written comments on the Draft EIR through December 3,
1990; and
;
03.
WHEREAS, a Final EIR document, which consisted of theo cri
Draft EIR with certain modifications to its text and the'-
incorporation of a chapter containing comments and responses torrr;,;;;
comments, was prepared, circulated for public information, and '
provided to the Planning Board on December 28, 1990, and to members
of the City Council and other interested parties during the week
of December 31, 1990; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board at its January 14, 1991
meeting considered the Final EIR and voted to recommend
Certification of Adequacy for the Final EIR to the City Council
based on the following finding:
1. The Final Environmental Impact Report has been prepared
in accordance with the California Environmental Quality
Act and the City of Alameda EIR Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered
the information contained in the Final EIR, including the revised
Summary Table S, the revised Figure 7, and the revised page 81 of
the Final EIR, pursuant to Section IV.(c) of the City of Alameda.
EIR Guidelines; and
1
WHEREAS, Section 21002.1 of the Public Resources Code
and Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines require that the
City Council make one or more written findings prior to approval
of a project for which an EIR has been completed that identifies
one or more significant effects of the project, along with the
facts supporting each finding; and
WHEREAS, Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code
requires that a mitigations monitoring/reporting plan be adopted
for the significant effects identified in the Final EIR; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Alameda that:
1. The City Council finds that the Final EIR has identified all
significant environmental effects of the project and that
there are no known potential environmental impacts not
addressed in the Final EIR.
2. The City Council finds that all significant effects of each
development alternative are set forth in the Final EIR.
3. The City Council finds that for Development Alternative 1 (66
space parking plan), for Development Alternative 2 (130 space
parking plan), and for Development Alternative 3 (408 space
parking plan), the Final EIR identifies certain environmental
effects that will result if any of these project development
alternatives is approved.
4. The City Council finds that for Development Alternative 1,
the Final EIR identifies certain environmental effects that
can be avoided or mitigated by the mitigation measures
incorporated in the Final EIR. These mitigation measures
pertain to (a) visual quality; (b) air quality; (c) noise;
(d) geology, 'soils and seismicity; (e) hydrology; (f) public
health; (g) cultural resources; and (h) population and
housing. Each measure is summarized in Revised Summary Table
S of the Final EIR and constitutes a change or alteration that
has been required in, or incorporated into, Development
Alternative 1, thereby avoiding or substantially lessening
the significant environmental effect as identified in the
Final EIR. The rationale for each mitigation measure is
provided in Revised Summary Table S, where warranted, and in
the body of the Final EIR.
5. The City Council further finds that for Development
Alternative 1, the Final EIR identifies certain other
environmental effects which cannot be avoided if this
development alternative is implemented. These remaining
unavoidable significant effects, set forth in Exhibit
are found to be acceptable when balanced against the facts
2
set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations
attached in Exhibit "II".
6. The City Council finds that for Development Alternative 2,
the Final EIR identifies certain environmental effects that
can be avoided or mitigated by the mitigation measures
incorporated in the Final EIR. These mitigation measures
pertain to (a) visual quality; (b) air quality; (c) noise;
(d) geology, soils and seismicity; (e) hydrology; (f) public
health; (g) cultural resources; and (h) population and
housing. Each measure is summarized in Revised Summary Table
S of the Final EIR and constitutes a change or alteration that
has been required in, or incorporated into, Development
Alternative 1, thereby avoiding or substantially lessening
the significant environmental effect as identified in the
Final EIR. The rationale for each mitigation measure is
provided in Revised Summary Table S, where warranted, and in
the body of the Final EIR.
7. The City Council further finds that for Development
Alternative 2, the Final EIR identifies certain other
environmental effects which cannot be avoided if this
development alternative is implemented. These remaining
unavoidable significant effects, set forth in Exhibit "I",
are found to be acceptable when balanced against the facts
set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations
attached in Exhibit "III".
8. The City Council finds that although the Final EIR identifies
certain significant environmental effects that will result if
Development Alternative 3 is implemented, all significant
effects that can be feasibly avoided or mitigated have been
avoided or mitigated by the mitigation measures incorporated
in the Final EIR.
9. The City Council finds that the Final EIR has described all
reasonable alternatives to the project that could feasibly
obtain the objectives of the project. Further, the City
Council finds that a good faith effort was made to incorporate
alternatives in the preparation of the Draft EIR and all
reasonable alternatives were considered in the review process
of the Final EIR and ultimate decisions on the project. The
project, as approved by this action, is included in that range
of alternatives.
10. The City Council determines that a monitoring and reporting
plan as required by California Public Resources Code section
21081.6 shall be implemented as follows. The plan shall
include adoption of mitigation measures identified in the
Final EIR and summarized in Revised Summary Table S of the
Final EIR. The Planning Department shall prepare an annual
report on the implementation of the measures. The various City
3
departments shall implement and monitor the mitigation
measures according to the responsibilities of the department.
For example, design review mitigation measures shall be
monitored by the Planning Department, TSM mitigation measures
shall be monitored by the Engineering Division, traffic and
parking mitigations shall be monitored by the Engineering
Division and the Public Works Department, and project design
and construction mitigations shall be implemented by the
project architect and contractor and shall be monitored by the
City's project coordinator.
11. The City Council finds that a good faith effort has been made
to seek out and incorporate all points of view in the
preparation of the Draft and Final EIR as indicated in the
public record of the project, including the Final EIR.
12. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information
contained in the Final EIR, pursuant to Section IV.(c) of the
City of Alameda EIR Guidelines, and has considered the
recommendation of the Planning Board as to the adequacy of
the Final EIR.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the City
of Alameda that said Council hereby certifies the Final
Environmental Impact Report (IS-90-13) for the new main
Library and associated improvements project as complete and
adequate in that it addresses all environmental effects of
the three development alternatives for the proposed project
and fully complies with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the
City of Alameda EIR Guidelines. Said Final Environmental
Impact Report is comprised of the following elements:
1. Final EIR dated December, 1990
2. Revised Summary Table S, Revised Figure 7, and Revised
Page 81 of the Final EIR
3. Planning Board Resolution No. 2145
4. Planning Board Staff Reports, dated November 15, 1990
and January 14, 1991
5. City Council Staff Report, dated February 6, 1991
6. City Council Minutes
7. City Council Resolution
8. Comments and Responses received prior to final actior
and not contained in 1 through 7 above.
4
EXHIBIT I
CEQA STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND FACTS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS -90 -13
SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE
PROPOSED PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED, FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO SAID
EFFECTS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, ALL WITH RESPECT
TO THE PROPOSED CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR
THE PROPOSED NEW MAIN LIBRARY AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS
BACKGROUND
CEOA Requirements
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA
Guidelines (Guidelines) promulgated pursuant thereto provide:
"No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for
which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more
significant environmental effects of the project unless the
public agency makes one or more written findings for each of
those significant effects accompanied by a brief explanation
of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility
and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the
agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted
by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such
other agency.
3. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR (Section 15091
of the Guidelines)."
Discussion of Alternatives
CEQA Guidelines require the discussion of a range of reasonable
alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project,
which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project.
Further, the Guidelines require the evaluation of the comparative
merits of the alternatives. Section V of the Final EIR evaluates
the following CEQA project alternatives: (1) No Project; (2)
Expansion of the Existing Carnegie Building; and (3) Development
of the Library on an Alternative Site.
1
However, by virtue of the City's proposal being a public project,
and one which has been widely discussed over a long period of time
in the community, the City has gone beyond the basic requirements
of CEQA in analyzing alternatives to its project. In response to
basic CEQA requirements, the City has looked at a number of
options, including the development of library facilities at
alternative sites, for achieving the library program. Of those
alternative sites, the LinOaks Motel site is felt to best meet the
objectives of the project. However, going beyond the requirements
of CEQA, the City has further evaluated various options for
achieving the library program on the LinOaks Motel site. These
options relate to the number of parking spaces provided and the
design and location of the parking facilities that would serve the
new library. The parking options constitute the three "development
alternatives" evaluated in the Final EIR and referenced below.
Project Description
The City of Alameda is considering approval of a request to permit
the construction of the proposed new main library and associated
improvements. The project includes: (1) the construction of a new
main library building containing 46,918 square feet of floor area,
to be located at the southeast corner of Lincoln Avenue and Oak
Street; (2) the construction of parking facilities at one or more
of three alternative sites; and (3) the rehabilitation, including
seismic upgrade, of the existing Carnegie building located at 2264
Santa Clara Avenue.
Three development alternatives exist, with the primary difference
between each alternative being the location and design of the
parking facilities that would be developed in conjunction with the
the new main library building. Development Alternative 1 would
provide 66 parking spaces, Development Alternative 2 would provide
130 parking spaces, and Development Alternative 3 would provide 408
parking spaces.
Because the proposed actions constitute a project under the CEQA
Guidelines, and because the City of Alameda has determined that the
project may have a significant effect on the enviroment, the City
has required the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR). This EIR has identified certain significant effects which
may occur as a result of the project on a cumulative basis in
conjunction with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable
future projects. Further, the City desires to approve this project
and, after determining that the EIR is complete and has been
prepared in accordance with CEQA and the Guidelines, the findings
set forth are herein made:
Ultimate development of the project under Development Alternative
3 (408 space parking plan) will not result in any significant
unavoidable adverse impacts to the environment. However, ultimate
development of the project under Development Alternative 1 (66
2
space parking plan) or Development Alternative 2 (130 space parking
plan) will result in certain significant unavoidable adverse
impacts to the environment, as indicated below and in the Final
EIR. With respect to those impacts, the City Council of Alameda
makes the findings as stated on the following pages.
FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS
IMPLEMENTED -- DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE 1 (66 space parking plan)
The following effects are those determined by the City of Alameda
to be significant environmental effects which cannot be avoided if
the project is implemented. All significant environmental effects
that can be feasibly avoided have been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a point of insignificance by virtue of mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR (Revised Summary Table S) and
incorporated into the project. The remaining, unavoidable
significant effects are acceptable when balanced against the facts
set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations For
Development Alternative 1 (Exhibit "II" of the Resolution), giving
greater weight to unavoidable environmental effects.
Traffic and Circulation
Significant Effect
Implementation of Development Alternative 1 (66 space parking plan)
would adversely affect parking and circulation in the project area.
Specifically, the project would result in a 103 space parking
deficit. Some of this unfulfilled 103 space demand would be
transferred to area on-street parking, already nearing capacity.
Increased congestion and spill over parking into neighboring
residential areas would result.
Findings
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect as identified in the Final
EIR.
1. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make
infeasible the project alternatives identified in the EIR
(Section 15091 of the Guidelines).
Facts in Support of Findings
The significant effect has been substantially lessened by virtpe
3
of Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated
into the project. These measures include the following:
1. Promote the City TSM program to library employees.
2. Provide off-site parking for library employees at one or more
of three sites in the vicinity of the project.
3. Reallocate to library patrons any City employee parking spaces
near Site A (new library site) that are made available due to
implementation of the City TSM program.
4. Provide bus shelters at all stops within a two block radius
of the new library, and permit the sale of AC Transit passes
at the library.
The significant effect has been substantially lessened to the
extent feasible. However, specific economic, social, or other
considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified
in the Final EIR and set forth in the subsequent sections of this
statement.
1. The project represents the best use for the specific sites and
for the project area.
2. The project as proposed satisfies the three primary objectives
stated in the Final EIR, namely (a) the construction of a new
main library that will adequately provide library services and
programs for the Alameda community through the year 2010; (b)
the enhancement of the Civic Center by introducing a building
that is consistent with the area's urban design and with other
land uses in the area, and (c) the seismic upgrade and
preservation of the historically significant Carnegie building
for a new public use. As such, the project as proposed
represents an invaluable public resource that will serve a
broad cross section of the community from a convenient Civic
Center location, whereas none of the CEQA project alternatives
identified in the Final EIR satisfies all three of the primary
objectives.
The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when
balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS
IMPLEMENTED -- DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE 2 1130 space parking plan)
The following effects are those determined by the City of Alameda
to be significant environmental effects which cannot be avoided if
the project is implemented. All significant environmental effects
that can be feasibly avoided have been eliminated or substantially
4
lessened by virtue of mitigation measures identified in the Final
EIR (Revised Summary Table S) and incorporated into the project.
The remaining, unavoidable significant effects are acceptable when
balanced against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations For Development Alternative 2 (Exhibit "III").
Traffic and Circulation
Significant Effect
Implementation of Development Alternative 2 (130 space parking
plan) would adversely affect parking and circulation in the project
area. Specifically, the project would result in a 49 space parking
deficit. Some of this unfulfilled 49 space demand would be
transferred to area on-street parking, already nearing capacity.
Increased congestion and spill over parking into neighboring
residential areas would result.
Findings
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect as identified in the Final
EIR.
3. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make
infeasible the project alternatives identified in the EIR
(Section 15091 of the Guidelines).
Facts in Support of Findings
The significant effect has been substantially lessened by virtue
of Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated
into the project. These measures include the following:
1. Promote the City TSM program to library employees.
2. Provide off-site parking for library employees at one or more
of three sites in the vicinity of the project.
3. Reallocate to library patrons any City employee parking spaces
near Site A (new library site) that are made available due to
implementation of the City TSM program.
4. Provide bus shelters at all stops within a two block radius
of the new library, and permit the sale of AC Transit passes
at the library.
The significant effect has been substantially lessened to the
extent feasible. However, specific economic, social, or other
considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified
5
in the Final EIR and set forth in the subsequent sections of this
statement.
1. The project represents the best use for the specific sites and
for the project area.
2. The project as proposed satisfies the three primary objectives
stated in the Final EIR, namely (a) the construction of a new
main library that will adequately provide library services and
programs for the Alameda community through the year 2010; (b)
the enhancement of the Civic Center by introducing a building
that is consistent with the area's urban design and with other
land uses in the area, and (c) the seismic upgrade and
preservation of the historically significant Carnegie building
for a new public use. As such, the project as proposed
represents an invaluable public resource that will serve a
broad cross section of the community from a convenient Civic
Center location, whereas none of the CEQA project alternatives
identified in the Final EIR satisfies all three of the primary
objectives.
The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when
balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Findings
1. The City;s proposed project has been designed in a manner so
as to provide the greatest public involvement in the planning
and CEQA process.
2. The following provides a brief description of project
alternatives.
3. The project alternatives have been rejected in favor of the
current project proposal.
4. The rationale for rejection of each project alternative is
provided below.
5. The rejection rationale is supported by the public record
but not limited to, the Certified Final EIR.
Alternative 1 -- No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative provides for no new development in the
project area.
6
Findings
Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible
the No Project Alternative described in the Final EIR in that:
1. The No Project Alternative would not meet the three primary
objectives of the current project proposal:
a. Construct a new Free Library that will adequately provide
library services and programs for the Alameda community
through the year 2010.
b. Enhance the Alameda Civic Center by introducing a
building that is consistent with the area's urban design
and with other land uses in the area.
(Note: The No Project Alternative would also not achieve
the beneficial land use and visual quality impacts to the
Civic Center associated with the demolition of the
LinOaks Motel, the upgrading of the Carnegie building,
and development of new commercial and parking space on
Santa Clara Avenue (Site D) or on Park Street (Site C)
c. Seismically upgrade and preserve the historically
significant Carnegie building for a new public use.
Alternative 2 -- Expansion of the Existing Carnegie Building
The Expansion of the Existing Carnegie Building Alternative
consists of two different plans. The first, a plan sponsored by the
City of Alameda and prepared by the firm of HME would demolish
several structures on adjoining parcels and construct a three
story, 22,000 square foot addition and a 77-space parking lot. This
plan would provide a total floor area of 33,550 square feet.
The other preliminary plan, prepared by the Committee to Retain
the Carnegie Library, would result in construction of a three story
28,850 square foot addition to the Carnegie building entirely on
City-owned property. Parking would be accommodated at an off-site
location. This plan would provide a total of 41,300 square feet of
space.
Findings - Plan 1 HME Plan
Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible
the Expansion of the Existing Carnegie Building Alternative
described in the Final EIR in that:
1. The Expansion of the Existing Carnegie Building Alternative
(HME Plan) would not meet two of the primary objectives of the
current project proposal:
7
a. Construct a new Free Library that will adequately provide
library services and programs for the Alameda community
through the year 2010.
(Note: The Library Space Needs Study, prepared in 1989
by Mr. Rob Richard, recommended a floor area of 46,918
square feet to meet the needs of the library through the
year 2010. The HME plan provides only 33,500 square feet.
b. Enhance the Alameda Civic Center by introducing a
building that is consistent with the area's urban design
and with other land uses in the area.
(Note: The HME Expansion Alternative would also not
achieve the beneficial land use and visual quality
impacts to the Civic Center associated with the
demolition of the LinOaks Motel and development of new
commercial and parking space on Santa Clara Avenue (Site
D) or on Park Street (Site C).
2. The HME plan for expansion would result in a significant
parking deficit, the loss of housing units, the loss of a
professional office building, and potential impacts to
cultural resources associated with the design of the
expansion.
3. The City has stated that it would not acquire the Church of
the Nazarene property which would be required for purposes of
expanding the Carnegie building.
Findings - Plan 2 -- Committee to Retain the Carnegie Library Plan
Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible
the Expansion of the Existing Carnegie Building Alternative
described in the Final EIR in that:
1. The Expansion of the Existing Carnegie Building Alternative
(Committee Plan) would not meet two of the primary objectives
of the current project proposal:
a. Construct a new Free Library that will adequately provide
library services and programs for the Alameda community
through the year 2010.
(Note: Absent detailed plans for the Committee's
proposal, it is difficult to assess whether this proposal
could adequately provide library services and programs
for the Alameda community through the year 2010.
b. Enhance the Alameda Civic Center by introducing a
building that is consistent with the area's urban design
and with other land uses in the area.
8
(Note: The Committee Expansion Alternative would also not
achieve the beneficial land use and visual quality
impacts to the Civic Center associated with the
demolition of the LinOaks Motel and development of new
commercial and parking space on Santa Clara Avenue (Site
D) or on Park Street (Site C).
2. The Committees's plan for expansion may result in potential
impacts to cultural resources associated with the design of
the expansion.
3. The Committee's plan would result in a parking deficit of 132
spaces, which would be considerably greater than any of the
City's development alternative parking space deficits.
4. The Committee's plan would result in a less efficient facility
requiring relatively greater staffing when compared with the
City's current project, given the three-story configuration
of the addition proposed in the Committee's plan, and it would
lack on-site parking. These issues are primary considerations
for a proposal to be favorably evaluated under the Proposition
85 Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act Funds program.
Alternative 3 -- Off-Site Alternative
The Off-Site Alternative would include the construction of a 46,918
square foot library and a surface parking lot providing
approximately 86 parking spaces on the Portola Triangle, a site
located approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the Civic Center.
Findings
Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible
the Off-Site Alternative described in the Final EIR in that:
1. The Off-Site Alternative would not meet one of the three
primary objectives of the current project proposal:
a. Enhance the Alameda Civic Center by introducing a
building that is consistent with the area's urban design
and with other land uses in the area.
(Note: The Off-Site Alternative would also not achieve
the beneficial land use and visual quality impacts to the
Civic Center associated with the demolition of the
LinOaks Motel and development of new commercial and
parking space on Santa Clara Avenue (Site D) or on Park
Street (Site C).
2. The site is located in a low density, predominantly
residential area that is remote from the Civic Center.
9
3. The site is not located on a major arterial road, has only
limited transit service, and is relatively inaccessible when
compared to Civic Center site alternative.
4. Development of this alternative would result in a parking
space deficit of 64 spaces, which could impact the adjoining,
predominantly residential neighborhood.
5. The development of this site would significantly diminish or
block views of the adjoining parklands and bay from residences
located north and east of the site.
10
EXHIBIT II
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE 1
The California Environmental Quality Act requires a public agency
to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve
the project. The City of Alameda has determined that the remaining
unavoidable risks of this project are acceptable when balanced
against the facts set forth below. In making this determination,
the following factors and public benefits were considered:
1. Development Alternative 1 fully satisfies the three primary
objectives for the project:
a. The new library will adequately provide library services
and programs for the Alameda community through the year
2010.
b. The project will enhance the visual and functional
character of the Alameda Civic Center by introducing a
building that is consistent with the area's urban design
and compatible with other land uses in the area. The
project will also result in beneficial land use and
visual quality impacts in the Civic Center associated
with the demolition of the LinOaks Motel and the
preservation of the Carnegie building.
c. The project will seismically upgrade and preserve the
historically significant Carnegie building for a new
public use.
2. The proposed project represents infill redevelopment located
in an urban area where adequate facilities and services exist.
3. The intensity of use represented by Development Alternative
1 is appropriate for the proposed sites and other properties
located in the vicinity of the Civic Center.
4. The proposed new main library represents an invaluable public
resource that will serve a broad cross section of the
community for many years to come. The proposed design and
location are essential for the facility to function in a
manner that will satisfy the needs of the community. In
addition to providing space and opportunities for research,
study and recreational reading, for which vocal demands have
been expressed in the Alameda community, the facility will
provide critically needed public space for meetings and events
in a convenient Civic Center location.
1
5. Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and
incorporated into the project, pertaining to the parking
deficit that would result from the implementation of this
development alternative, substantially lessen the significance
of this environmental effect.
6. The City has developed several proposals to construct a
parking structure on Oak Street between Santa Clara Avenue and
Central Avenue to serve the parking needs for Civic Center
facilities and other users. Currently under consideration is
the 408 space structure analyzed in Development Alternative
3 of the Final EIR. This design would satisfy expected
cumulative demand for off-street parking in the vicinity and
even lessen on-street demand for parking. It is anticipated
that a public parking structure will be developed by the City
at this site, or possibly at an alternative Civic Center site.
Construction of such a facility would reduce to a level of
insignificance the parking-related effects that would result
from the implementation of Development Alternative 1.
2
EXHIBIT III
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE 2
The California Environmental Quality Act requires a public agency
to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve
the project. The City of Alameda has determined that the remaining
unavoidable risks of this project are acceptable when balanced
against the facts set forth below. In making this determination,
the following factors and public benefits were considered:
1. Development Alternative 2 fully satisfies the three primary
objectives for the project:
a. The new library will adequately provide library services
and programs for the Alameda community through the year
2010.
b. The project will enhance the visual and functional
character of the Alameda Civic Center by introducing a
building that is consistent with the area's urban design
and compatible with other land uses in the area. The
project will also result in beneficial land use and
visual quality impacts in the Civic Center associated
with the demolition of the LinOaks Motel and the
preservation of the Carnegie building.
c. The project will seismically upgrade and preserve the
historically significant Carnegie building for a new
public use.
2. The proposed project represents infill redevelopment located
in an urban area where adequate facilities and services exist.
3. The intensity of use represented by Development Alternative
1 is appropriate for the proposed sites and other properties
located in the vicinity of the Civic Center.
4. The proposed new main library represents an invaluable public
resource that will serve a broad cross section of the
community for many years to come. The proposed design and
location are essential for the facility to unction in a
manner that will satisfy the needs of the community. In
addition to providing space and opportunities for research,
study and recreational reading, for which vocal demands have
been expressed in the Alameda community, the facility will
provide critically needed public space for meetings and events
in a convenient Civic Center location.
1
5. Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and
incorporated into the project, pertaining to the parking
deficit that would result from the implementation of this
development alternative, substantially lessen the significance
of this environmental effect.
6. The City has developed several proposals to construct a
parking structure on Oak Street between Santa Clara Avenue and
Central Avenue to serve the parking needs for Civic Center
facilities and other users. Currently under consideration is
the 408 space structure analyzed in Development Alternative
3 of the Final EIR. This design would satisfy expected
cumulative demand for off-street parking in the vicinity and
even lessen on-street demand for parking. It is anticipated
that a public parking structure will be developed by the City
at this site, or possibly at an alternative Civic Center site.
Construction of such a facility would reduce to a level of
insignificance the parking-related effects that would result
from the implementation of Development Alternative 2.
2
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution
was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the
City of Alameda in special meeting assembled on the eleventh day
of February, 1991, by the following vote to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers Arnerich, Camicia, Thomas,
Withrow and President Corica - 5.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTENTIONS: None.
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the
official seal of said City this thirteenth day of February, 1991.
Diane Felsch, City Clerk
City of Alameda