My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
94-020
Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
1952 - 1999
>
1994
>
94-020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 12:30:58 PM
Creation date
6/26/2003 10:46:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Resolution
Doc #
94-20
Date
5/16/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
RESOLUTION 94-020 343 <br /> <br />No Project Alternative <br /> <br />Finding <br /> <br />Finding 3: <br /> <br />Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infea- <br />sible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified <br />in the final EIIL <br /> <br />Fact~ in Support of Finding <br /> <br />Under the No Project Alternative, the alignment of McFadden Avenue would <br />remain the same, the width of McFadden Avenue would remain the same, <br />and the offset intersection along Main Street would remain. Implementation <br />of the No Project Alternative would not incur the complete removal of 17 <br />residences, two businesses, one church and one chapel, as well as partial <br />impacts to the yards of four other residences. Noise levels adjacent to the <br />residences along the proposed realignment would not increase beyond those <br />levels projected for the future no project condition. The No Project Mtema- <br />five would not generate short-term negative construction impacts such as <br />noise, dust and traffic on the project area, View envelopes within the extst. <br />ing neighborhoods adjacent to McFadden Avenue would not be altered, and <br />area residents would not be exposed to intensified street lighting in the <br />proposed realignment area. <br /> <br />In Contrast, however, the No Project Alternative would not create the follow- <br />ing benefits that the proposed project would generate: <br /> <br />Improved traffic flow on Main Street and McFadden Avenue. <br />Improved public safety in the vicinity. <br />Reduction in congestion and consequent improvement in air quality. <br />Enhancement of intersection operation (signalization). <br /> <br />Mthough the No Project Alternative eliminates many of the proposed <br />project's potential environmental impacts, this alternative fails to achieve the <br />basic objectives of the project, and would result in adverse impacts of its <br />own, such as continued or worsening traffic flow congestion and consequent <br />worsening of air quality, The No Project Alternative is therefore rejected as <br />infeasible. <br /> <br />Alternatives Considered and Rejected <br /> <br />Ftndin~z <br /> <br />Finding 3: <br /> <br />Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infea- <br />sible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified <br />in the final EIIL <br /> <br />0~,/t XD,t(X: ,.SI,,IA.~O2'*. IqNDll~G$.RFI3 13 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.