2 - EIR18-01; DA18-01; GPA18-06; AA18-10_2525 N MAIN STREET

Home Browse Search

EXHIBIT A Resolution No. _____ Page 52 of 76 Certification of the Magnolia at the Park EIR To evaluate the potential traffic impacts related to the Modified Project, a Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis (included as Attachment B to the Clarifications to the Final EIR) was prepared and peer reviewed by a City-selected independent traffic engineer and the City’s traffic engineering staff. The Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis evaluates operation of 278 multi-family units, which is 22 more units than the Modified Project that consists of 256, and therefore, provides an overstated and conservative analysis of potential impacts. The analysis determined that the Modified Project would develop 48 percent fewer residential units than the Original Project, which would result in 79 fewer a.m. peak hour trips, 96 fewer p.m. peak hour trips, and 1,186 fewer daily trips than the Original Project. Thus, no new impacts related to the volume of vehicular trips would occur from the Modified Project. Additionally, the Modified Project would implement changes to the Main Street and Walkie Way intersection geometrics that would result in less than significant impacts to study area intersections, roadway segments, and vehicle queues; which is consistent with the impacts of the Original Project as detailed in the EIR. Based on the foregoing, none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 that would trigger the need to prepare a recirculated EIR or other environmental document exist. The Modified Project would not result in either a new significant environmental impact or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified impact. (Final EIR, Clarifications to the Final EIR, Section 3.11.) 9.15.2 Air Traffic Patterns Threshold: Would the Project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? Finding: No impact. (DEIR, p. 2-8, Initial Study, p. 58.) Facts in Support of Finding: The Project does not propose any uses that would affect air traffic patterns or air traffic levels. No portion of the Project would change air traffic patterns by extending into airspace. The closest operating airport is over 6 miles south of the Project site. The Project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns. (DEIR, p. 2-8, Initial Study, p. 58.) For the reasons discussed above and the reasons discussed in the DEIR, impacts associated with this issue would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. (DEIR, p. 2-8, Initial Study, p. 58.) This conclusion also applies, for the same reasons, to the Modified Project 9.15.3 Design Feature Hazards Threshold: Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Finding: Less than significant impact. (DEIR, pp. 4.11-33.) Facts in Support of Finding: The Project would not result in hazards related to a design feature or incompatible use. The Project driveways include direct access to the parking structure, and access from N. Main Street would be restricted to right-turn ingress/right-turn egress to provide for safe and effective circulation. As noted in the Traffic Impact Analysis referenced in the DEIR, motorists entering and exiting the Project site would be able to do so comfortably, safely, and without undue congestion. Moreover, and as noted by the Traffic Impact Analysis, the neighborhood intersections and roadway have adequate capacity to support the Project. (DEIR, pp. 4.11-33.) 2-82