Laserfiche WebLink
(2) they would likely be unaesthetic (wall on bridge structure with no <br />landscaping opportunity) or unnatural-looking (30 ft. high levee-like berm) along the <br />designated I-680 scenic route; <br />b. City General Plan standards allow noise levels to exceed 60dB in outdoor <br />azeas when necessary to achieve other Genera] Plan goals. <br />c. The GHCBI Project has incorporated the mitigation measure requiring <br />indoor noise levels [o achieve the City standard of 45dB Ldu. (See Specific Plan <br />Noise Attenuation Policy 2, Guideline 2.5.) <br />d. The GHCBI Project has incorporated requirements for using site <br />development patterns, housing produce type options, and/or building construction <br />techniques to minimize outdoor noise to the extent feasible (PUD Condition ~. <br />e. The No Project Alternative is the only alternative which would avoid this <br />impact. It is rejected because it would not meet any of the Project Sponsor s objectives <br />nor would it fulfill any of the City's objectives for this site, including provision of <br />additional housing, open space, affordable housing, an elementary school site and <br />public improvements. <br />3. Im acn t L Ib. Proposed residential development on the West Parcel south of the I- <br />680 overcrossing of the Pleasanton Avenue extension would be exposed to a Ldn of <br />greater than 60 dB. <br />Mitigation Measure: <br />Measure Llb. Require detailed project-specific noise studies for each development <br />project th an azea where [he standazd is exceeded to chazacterize noise conditions and <br />to identify the noise reduction features that must be incorporated [o achieve acceptable <br />interior noise levels, and require incorporation of those features into construction. <br />Finding: Specific economic, social, or other considerations make unfeasible <br />mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. <br />Facts in Support of Finding: The Following facts demonstrate that it is not feasible to <br />mitigate the impact to a less than significant level. <br />a. The Facts in Support of Finding for Impact L I a(l) are incorporated by <br />reference. <br />4. Impact Llc(11. Proposed residential development on the Contra] Parcel south of <br />the Village Center would be exposed to a Ldn of greater than 60 dB. <br />Mitigation Measures: <br />59 <br />