AgdaPkt 2013-01-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.A. - Page 194 Pete's Harbor c:ity ot r�eawooa Lity EIR Addendum October 8, 2012 Page 3-31 Secondary Impact 7-10A Analysis: Project-Related Secondary Impact of the Blomquist Extension on the Blomquist Street/Maple Street Intersection. The 2003 EIR indicated a potentially significant secondary project impact resulting from construction of the Blomquist Street Extension (whose completion was assumed under the Cumulative traffic scenario). While mitigating the identified emergency access impact, the 2003 EIR indicated that completion of the Blomquist Extension would cause the Blomquist Street/Maple Street intersection to operate at unacceptable LOS in both the AM and PM peak hours under Background Conditions (i.e., with the addition of already approved projects to the roadway network) both with or without the 2003 project traffic. The 2003 EIR indicated that addition of the 2003 project traffic would add an average delay of more than 5.0 seconds to that intersection and would also satisfy the Caltrans Peak-Hour Volume warrant for traffic signal installation. Both of these effects would constitute a significant project impact according to City significance criteria. The associated 2003 EIR mitigation included three options for improving the Blomquist Street/Maple Street intersection (four-way stop signs, signalization with lane modifications, or a roundabout), any one of which would have reduced this project secondary impact to a less-than- significant level. Under the Background Conditions and Project Conditions evaluated for the current Pete's Harbor project (including the completion of One Marina), the Blomquist Street/Maple Street intersection still would operate at unacceptable LOS both with or without the project traffic, but only in the PM peak hour, not in the AM peak hour as was the case under 2003 conditions. The currently proposed project, in combination with One Marina, would continue to add an average delay of more than 5.0 seconds to the intersection, but only in the PM peak hour; the delay would continue to satisfy the Caltrans Peak-Hour Volume warrant for traffic signal installation. Conclusion. Modified mitigation. The 2003 EIR-identified Mitigation 7-10A remains applicable to the current Pete's Harbor project and remains sufficient to reduce this secondary impact to a less-than-significant level. However, since the current project would no longer require the Blomquist Extension for emergency access, the mitigation would not be solely the applicant's responsibility; instead, the applicant would make a fair-share contribution to the funding of the intersection, to be added to contributions from other cumulative development in the area. Impact 7-11 Analysis: Project Impacts on C/CAG's Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Roadway Network--AM and PM Peak Hours. The 2003 EIR indicated that, because the 2003 project would generate more than 100 net new peak-hour trips on the CMP roadway network, the project must meet adopted C/CAG guidelines for reducing trips. The associated 2003 EIR mitigation required implementation of a project-specific Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program that meets C/CAG requirements. The 2003 EIR indicated that this TDM program would need to be approved by both the City and C/CAG prior to City approval of any tentative subdivision map for the proposed project. The current Pete's Harbor project would generate approximately 157 to 176 peak-hour trips (see Table 3.4-1). Therefore, even though the current project would generate substantially fewer peak-hour trips that than the 2003 EIR project, the number still would exceed 100, and therefore a TDM program per adopted C/CAG guidelines would still be required. Conclusion. Modified impact and mitigation. The updated 2004 C/CAG guidelines supersede the previously applicable 1999 guidelines. The impact and mitigation as modified for Impact 7- T.•1106951Addenduml3(10695-01).doc