Res11 15086 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

01/24/2011 Exhibit B (i) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation of this project impact could be achieved by Mitigation Measure 9 -19 (page 9 -73 of the DEIR) which would require reconfiguration of the northbound approach so as to reduce the critical delay to less than 5 seconds. However, the improvements required by Mitigation Measure 9 -19 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of Caltrans, and can and should be adopted by Caltrans. Because implementation of this mitigation measure is outside of the City's jurisdiction, it is deemed infeasible and therefore this impact is deemed to be significant and unavoidable. (ii) Remaining Impacts. Because there are no feasible mitigation measures available to mitigate the significant impact identified above, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. (iii) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other benefits of the DPP override the significant adverse impacts of the DPP relating to the cumulative traffic impacts described above, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations below. Impact 9 -20. Cumulative Impact on Bradford Street/Main Street Intersection. Under Cumulative With Project Conditions during both the AM and PM peak hour, the intersection would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F. The additional project traffic would cause the critical delay to increase by more than five (5) seconds. a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed on pages 9 -58 to 9 -64 of the DEIR. b) Findings. Based on the FEIR and the entire record before the City, the City Council finds that: (i) Mitigation Measures. Mitigation of this project impact could be achieved by Mitigation Measure 9 -20 (page 9 -74 of the DEIR) which would require signalization of the intersection. However, the City adopted PED policies in the City's New General Plan that are intended to promote alternative modes of transportation in the DPP area, emphasizing pedestrian and bicycle travel and a reduction in the number of vehicle miles traveled within and by residents of the City. Mitigation Measure 9 -20 would conflict with these policies by impeding pedestrian mobility at the intersection. In addition, as explained above, this potentially significant cumulative impact could be considered less than significant under the City's new LOS policies. Assuming, however, that this identified traffic increase represents a potentially significant cumulative impact, because implementing Mitigation Measure 9 -20 would conflict with the City's PED policies, this measure is deemed infeasible and this potentially significant cumulative impact is deemed to be significant and unavoidable. (ii) Remaining Impacts. Because there are no feasible mitigation U:\Resolutions\2011 \Reso 15086 Exhibit B.doc 37 012011 Reso. # 15086 Muff #601