AgdaPkt 2011-01-24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8.0 Exhi�� 90 ' 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. The PED policies do so by, among other things, slowing traffic and enhancing pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure to ensure that the City`s DPP street network facilitates safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle travel. The removal of the sidewalk on Jefferson Avenue would conflict with these policies by decreasing pedestrian infrastructure. Moreover, as explained above with regard to Impact 9-2, the New General Plan contains additional policies and programs pursuant to which the City will no longer rely on specific LOS measurements to determine the significance of a project's potential traffic impacts in the downtown area, and pursuant to these new LOS Policies and programs, this potential cumulative impact could be considered less than significant. Assuming, however, that this identified traffic increase represents a patentially significant cumulative impact, because implementing Mitigation Measure 9-2 would conflict with the City's PED policies, and because the improvements required by this mitigation measure are not within the City's jurisdiction, this mitigation measure is deemed infeasible, and this impact is deemed to be significant and unavoidable. (ii) Remaining Impacts. Because there are no feasible mitigation measures avaiiable 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 ovenide the significant adverse impacts of the DPP relating to the cumulative traffic impacts described above, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations beiow. Impact 9-12: Cumulative Impact on Main Street/Woodside Road Westbound Ramps Intersection. Under Cumulative With Project Conditions during both the AM and PM peak hour, this intersecYion would continue to operate at an unacceptable LOS F. The additional project traffic would cause the critical delay to increase by more than five (5) seconds, plus the peak hour signal warrant. a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed an 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 9-3 as discussed under Impact 9-3, above. However, as noted above, the improvements proposed by Mitigation Measure 9-3 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. S:\RESQLUTIONS\Reso. 2U92 CEQA Findings for DPP Eahibit B.doc 30 012011