CC Min 1995-05-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

an EIR. Improvements on Seaport Blvd. were discussed with the City Traffic Division. In July 1, 1993 Wiltec and Associates, performed the traffic count for trucks on Seaport Blvd. The 1993 truck count shows that there is acceptable level of service in the traffic flow and trucks can safely pull in and out of driveways. In response to statements made in the appeals about truck safety and whether the EIR addresses this issue, truck safety is directly related to street design and capacity, the EIR does address truck safety because it addresses street design and capacity. John Torrey spoke on the issue raised about recirculating the draft EIR and that one correction on the errata sheet did not change the results of the extensive analysis on the noise issue. Christine Schneider stated that several interviews were conducted on the issue of noise and the analysis concluded that there were no new noise impacts other than what was stated in the draft EIR. John Torrey advised that dust and odor issues were addressed as part of the air quality for the project site. A fiscal cost revenue analysis was done in the EIR to address costs and revenues that were associated with the project. There was no requirement to address the economic impacts of the project on pre-existing uses in the area. The errata sheet in the EIR attempted to discuss under what conditions an assessment district could be established for the area. The Sedway report addressed the range of alternatives available. In summary he stated that the EIR is an adequate document and he referred to the rule of reason. Councilman Sanfilipo asked for further information on trip generation and impacts on 101/ Woodside Road! Seaport Blvd interchange. Jim Daisa stated that at one location there exists the only unmitigated impact at the loop offramp merge with Woodside Road from southbound 101. The project would be expected to affect this portion of the interchange significantly. This impact cannot be mitigated without major reconstruction of the interchange. There are other impacts on the main line but not on city surface streets. Vice Mayor Hartnett asked for information from City Attorney Schricker on the difference between a program and a master plan EIR. City Attorney Schricker stated than a program EIR is one which contemplates a series of projects or events regarding development of a particular area so that the program EIR may be in very general terms and later could be supplemented or amplified by project EIR's which would depend on the program EIR. City Attorney Schricker advised the project in front ofthe Council appears to be a project EIR in the sense that it deals with a particular site with a particular proposed planned use. Vice Mayor Hartnett referred to the issue of reverse impact and lack of CEQA guidance on this issue. Regular Meeting Minutes MINUTE BOOK NO. 53 May 8, 1995 Page No. 168 Page 9