Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> SWC: sh 5/16/86 <br /> SWC:djc 5/19/86R <br /> (h) Actual approval authority of many of the potentially <br />required changes or alterations in the Project which would reduce <br />the effect of traffic problems anticipated from the Project and <br />other eastside projects is exclusively within the responsibility <br />and jurisdiction of other public agencies (specifically, the <br />Department of Transportation of the State of California and <br />regional transportation planning agencies) and not the City of <br />Redwood City. Also, the Cities of Belmont and San Carlos will <br />have a necessary voice in the determination and approval of <br />measures necessary to mitigate such regional traffic impacts. <br /> (i) Specific economic, social, and other considerations <br />make infeasible other mitigation measures and the project <br />alternatives identified or discussed int he final EIR with <br />respect to transportation impacts also identified therein (draft <br />EIR, pp. 18-41) in that the estimated cost of such mitigation <br />measures (viz. , widening of the Bayshore Freeway [State Highway <br />101], El Camino Real, Whipple Avenue, and Woodside Road) are not <br />reasonably within revenue projections of said Department of <br />Transportation or regional agencies nor are they likely to be <br />included in anticipated construction projects thereof in the <br />foreseeable future. <br /> (j ) Notwithstanding the foregoing considerations, this <br />Council further finds that the evidence of the anticipated <br />effects of traffic is not fully conclusive in that it is based <br />upon conservative assumptions and projections. Further, there is <br />not clear and convincing evidence that regional, state, or other <br />jurisdictions can or would respond to alleviate the effects of <br /> 9 <br /> "-----.. <br />