AgdaPkt 2017-01-09 Closed and Joint

Browse Search

TA. - Page 80 Summary of Impacts Potentially Less than Significant Less than Significant With Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES -- Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Solid waste? X X X X X Conclusion: Regarding public services, the proposed project would not result in any new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)). All impacts are adequately evaluated in the certified Downtown Precise Plan program EIR. The proposed project is also consistent with the Downtown Precise Plan (CEQA Guidelines Section 15183). Documentation: a. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in substantial physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives beyond those identified in the DTPP program EIR (pp. 8-1 through 8-21). The project site is served by the City of Redwood City Fire and Police departments. The Fire Department facility serving the project site is Station 9 at 755 Marshall Street, on the same block as the project site, about two hundred feet away to the southeast. The Police Department is headquartered at 1301 Maple Street, approximately one-half mile from the project site. Personnel from both departments participate in the City's Plan Review Committee (PRC) process and reviewed the proposed project. Neither department identified a need for new or altered fire or police facilities as a result of the proposed project. The project would be required to pay mandatory school impact fees. Furthermore, the DTPP program EIR (pp. 8-2 through 8-21) concluded that there would be no significant impacts on fire%mergency medical service, parks and recreation, schools, or solid waste service resulting from the DTPP or projects built under it. The DTPP program EIR (p. 8-3) did, however, identify a potentially significant impact regarding emergency response and evacuation in the Precise Plan area due to traffic congestion on local roads. Mitigation 8-1 directs the City to implement signal detectors to provide priority traffic signal timing for emergency response vehicles, which would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. This program is underway, and to -date signal detectors have been installed at all of the traffic signals along the Jefferson Avenue corridor between El Camino Real and Bradford Street, and at all signals along the Marshall Street corridor between Main Street and Arguello Street. The project design would be required to comply with all applicable City and State codes and regulations pertaining to emergency access, as well as fire protection and security. For example, project plans (Plan Sheet A2.1, 12/2115; BKF Engineers, October 26, 2015, p. 3) note the following fire protection components: ■ The building would be fully sprinklered. ■ The building would have afire pump room and afire control room. Both of the above fire protection components are subject to review and approval by the City and would be conditions ofproject approval. An existing hydrant is located directly across Bradford Street from the project; the final location and number of hydrants would be reviewed and confirmed by the Fire Marshal. Flow tests have not been performed; historical data for the existing water system north of the project site (at 500 Jefferson Avenue) provided by the Community Development Department indicated that the rate of output in 2011 for the hydrant model was greater than 5,500 gallons per minute (gpm). Final confirmation of the fire flow adequacy shall be provided by the Fire Protection 33