AgdaPkt 2003-08-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

L Ad The Findings Resolution lists each of the environmental topics and impacts described in the EIR. In some cases the EIR has determined that the project will have no environmental impact, and in these cases the Findings Resolution does not discuss them further. In some cases the EIR has determined that the project will have a potential impact on the environment but with the applicatic.n of mitigation measures the impact is reduced to a less- than - significant level. Finally, there are impacts of the project that are deemed potentially significant and the proposed mitigation does not reduce the impact to less- than - significant. In some cases this is because the mitigation would address the problem but it is deemed infeasible. As an example: the EIR suggests adding lanes to freeway on -ramps as traffic mitigation. The traffic engineers deem that this would mitigate the impact; however the mitigation would require the approval of Caltrans and is beyond the City's control. In other cases the mitigation is feasible but even when implemented it does not entirely reduce the impact to less -than- significant. An example of this type of impact is construction noise and vibration. The Findings Resolution also includes what is called a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for those impacts that cannot be mitigated or reduced to less -than- significant impacts and provides a summary of the project's benefits to weigh against these unmitigatable impacts. The Council is being asked to adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations prior to approving the project providing a determination can be made that the project benefits outweigh possible environmental costs resulting from the project. The proposed project has significant unmitigable impacts (referred to as 'significant unavoidable' or 'cumulative significant unavoidable' impacts) in three areas: noise, traffic and water, as discussed following. 1. Noise. The EIR identifies construction noise and vibration impacts that can not be entirely mitigated. These impacts, however, are considered temporary in nature. 2. Traffic. The EIR also identifies a number peak hour intersection, freeway ramp and freeway impacts that can not be mitigated. While the Kaiser EIR describes mitigation measures that may not be feasible and that will thus likely not be implemented for the unmitigatable traffic impacts identified in the EIR, the Kaiser Precise Plan does provide a means for monitoring and potentially reducing these impacts. For example, the Precise Plan (beginning on page 43) requires the project applicant to establish a baseline traffic study for the entire project prior to any construction. Then, at the time of submittal for the Permit for Phase II (the hospital and attendant buildings/ structures) a traffic consultant will be hired to collect data on the operation of the previous phase (Phase I - medical office building (MOB1)) of development. At this time, the traffic study would look at the traffic that had been estimated in the baseline study, and compare it with actual data from the first MOB. If this and future traffic analysis indicate that the traffic increase from a previous phase of development is more than 15% higher than anticipated, staff and Planning Commission would require Kaiser to implement a program to bring the development into conformance to the standards established in the Precise Plan. 2