AgdaPkt 2017-04-03 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

25 under it. The project is in compliance with all applicable DTPP standards and, as a result, no additional impacts on recreation are anticipated. There is no evidence that additional park and recreational facilities will need to be constructed, beyond that studied in conjunction with the DTPP. Nor is there any evidence that the project will result in substantial physical deterioration of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. Pursuant to Chapter 18, Article XVI of the Municipal Code, the project would be required to pay a Parks Impact Fee for the net new 350 dwelling units. The DTPP EIR (pp. 8-1 through 8-6) likewise concluded that there would be no significant impacts on police/fire/emergency medical services as a result of the DTPP. The Initial Study Checklist explained that the Police headquarters are located less than one mile north of the project site, and the Fire Department facility serving this location is less than one-half mile north of the project site. While the DTPP EIR identified a potentially significant impact regarding emergency response and evacuation, Mitigation Measure 8-1 (directing the City to implement signal detectors to prioritize traffic signal timing for emergency vehicles) would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The City has installed emergency vehicle preemption systems along the El Camino Real, Jefferson Avenue, and Marshall Street corridors in and around the Downtown. 6. The Project Will Not Create Greenhouse Gas Emission Impacts Appellant’s Contention: The project will result in greenhouse gas emission impacts caused by traffic and residents searching for parking given that the project is “under- parked,” which requires further environmental review. (Appeal, pp. 21.) City Response: As discussed above, the project will not create any new significant impacts or substantial increases in the severity of any previously identified significant impact with respect to automobile travel. The appellant incorrectly states that the project is “under-parked,” however the opposite is true. The project as revised based on the Conditions of Approval (convert the ground floor corner residential unit to retail) requires a minimum of 380 parking spaces (18 spaces for retail/362 spaces for residential). The project provides a total of 441 parking spaces, which exceeds the minimum requirement by 61 parking spaces. The project will thus not have any new greenhouse gas emission impacts associated with traffic and drivers searching for parking. Moreover, greenhouse gas emissions were previously studied in the DTPP EIR. With regard to greenhouse gas emissions related to vehicle trips associated with residential buildings, a trip generation study for the adjacent and recently completed residential project at 299 Franklin Street (Hexagon Transportation Consultants, August 5, 2016) was prepared. The study determined that the observed mode split for pedestrian and bicycle trips in the AM and PM peak hours exceeded the anticipated mode split projections in the DTPP EIR (Table 9.7, Page 9-41). This would have the effect of a greenhouse gas emission reduction associated with residential buildings for the 299 Franklin development. The project is expected to achieve a mode split comparable to the rate anticipated in the DTPP EIR and may perform comparably to the 299 Franklin development. Also, the project traffic analysis demonstrates that conservative assumptions were built into the traffic analysis 8.A. - Page 25