AgdaPkt 2013-11-18 Special - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8.A. - Page 48 The project Grac&ng Plan (BDE Architecture and Sanc&s, Plan Sheet C-2, 7/31/2013) illustrates specifications for the relatively minor grac&ng reguired to integrate the proposed project design into the existing landscape and infrastructure, subject to City review and approval. d The Downtown Precise Plan program EIR (p. 16-6) determined that development within the DTPP area may be subjected to hazards from expansive soils, representing a potentially significant impact Mitigafion 16-1 reguires that the geotechnical report reguired by the City Builc&ng Official include an analysis of expansive soil hazards and recommended stabilizafion measures. Implementation of these measures, combined with conformance with standard California Builc&ng Code and other applicable State and local regulations (all of which will be reguired as conc&tions of approval for the project) will reduce the potential effect of exp�sive soils to a less-than-significant level. In adc&tion, the DTPP program EIR (p. 16-8) also noted that development occurring under the DTPP would be subject to damage due to the presence of corrosive soils within the DTPP area.Mifigation 16-2 specifies that buned metal infrastructure have cathoc&c protecting using a sacnficial anode system that conforms to Part VII(G) of the City's water system design cntena and standard specificafion details Section 02661. Adc&tionally, concrete mixes mustconform to Caltrans specificafions forProtection ofReinforcementAgainstCorrosion Due to Chlondes,Acids, and Sulfates as outlined in Memo to Designers 10-5, Tanuary 2002. These measures, which shall be reguired as conc&tions of approval for the projec� will reduce the potential impacts of corrosive soils on the project to a less- than-significant level. e. There would be no use of sepfic tanks or alternative wastewater c&sposal systems for the project No impact will occur. Summary of Impacts Potentially Less than Signifcant Less than Significant With Mitigation Signifcant No Im act Incor orated Im act Im act VIL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS -- YVould the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or induectly,that may have X a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan,policy or regulation adopted for the purpose X of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? c) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death X involving flooding caused by sea level rise resulting from global climate change? Documentation: a. A limited amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will occur dunng demolition and construction activifies. Fxcavation �d construcfion are zrpected to lastfor appraximately 24 months. Due to the relatively small size of the site and the limited durafion of construcfion, construction emissions for the project will not be substantial. Construction emissions will be temporary in nature and will not significantly contnbute to regional GHG levels In adc&tion, the DTPP program EIR (pp. 13-20 through 13-23) determined that while the occupancy and operatian of DTPP facilitated projects would generate GHG emissions, these emissions would be below the BAAQMD GHG emissions significance threshold�d would be a less-than-significant impact b. The project would not con,jlict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions (DTPP program EIR Chapter 13). The project is located in an area designated by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) as a `Pnonty Development Area" and will help accommodate anticipated growth as part of the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy for reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, no negative impacts on applicable GHG plans are anficipated c. The DTPP program EIR (pp. 13-22 and 13-23) determined that the DTPP area could be subject to jlooc&ng due to sea level nse associated with global climate change, placing people, structures, and other improvements at an increased nsk of injury or loss from flooc&ng.Mifigation 13-1 reguired that the City prepare strategies to respond to the impact of flooc&ng, but acknowledged that given the unprecedented nature and uncertainty regarc&ng this emerging issue, it could not be concluded thatMitigation 13-1 would reduce this potential impact to a less-than - significant level. The City Council ofRedwood City concluded that the environmenta� social economic, and other benefits of the DTPP override the significant adverse impacts of flooc&ng due to sea level nse and adopted a 13