01 - Laserfiche WebLink

before any others, one of those being completion of SR -84. She said the regional framework is fine, but this seemed the most effective way to ensuring the completion of SR -84 sooner rather than later. Director of Community Development Brian Dolan introduced the SEIR, noting that in some cases the agreements described by Mr. Bocian actually take environmental mitigation above and beyond what is required in both the EIR and SEIR. In response to challenges to the original EIR prepared for the project, the City agreed to prepare a supplemental analysis on several biologically sensitive issues, in particular several species, including the California Tiger Salamander, California Red - legged Frog, Western Pond Turtle, and San Joaquin Spearscale. With respect to the California Tiger Salamander and Red - legged Frog, the supplemental analysis came to the same conclusion as the original document, and no new mitigation is required. While there were two sightings of the Western Pond Turtle not acknowledged in the EIR, it turns out that the mitigation is the same whether they are known or simply thought to be present, and no new mitigation is required. The SEIR reevaluated its original approach and conclusion regarding the San Joaquin Spearscale and, in doing so, identified 1.77 existing acres of species to be protected in an offsite mitigation location. As discussed by Mr. Bocian, a supplemental agreement has provided for funds to be set aside for that much mitigation acreage at minimum and will likely provide substantially more. Mr. Dolan stated the public and several interest groups also presented several specific questions relative to cumulative impacts and in response, the SEIR presented the environmental analysis much more clearly in terms of addressing the proposed extension of Stoneridge Drive. The SEIR also contains two very specific and clear alternatives for consideration, those being the four -lane extension and two -lane constrained extension. These new roadway alternatives required the noise analysis to be revisited in more detail. He reviewed the analyses' conclusions, stating that all identified impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels with one exception in the vicinity of Chocolate Street. Anticipated noise levels in this area reach 64 decibels, are mitigated to 61 decibels by the noise attenuating pavement, but still exceed the City's residential standard of 60 decibels. The SEIR determined that additional mitigation would come in the form of raising the existing sound wall in this area by one foot. The end result of the SEIR relative to noise is that the sound wall be increased by one foot and that Stoneridge Drive be repaved from Camp Drive to Trevor Parkway with noise attenuating pavement. The County has agreed to install and contribute $500,000 toward this repaving. He noted while all impacts were reduced to standard levels with mitigation, the project cannot meet the new General Plan's standard for thresholds of significance related to noise. The standard, which was not in place at the time of the EIR, states that any increase of 4 decibels or more in any location is itself considered a significant impact. He suggested this may be something the Council wishes to look at in the future, as staff is learning that the standard does not always make sense when applied in low decibel environments. Mr. Dolan also noted that since the time the EIR was published, the methodology for greenhouse gas emissions analysis has rapidly evolved. In looking at this project with new methodology, staff had to concede that the project actually did exceed the standards in place at that time. He stressed that while they did not have the benefit of this information at that time, many best management practices such as green building, bicycle parking, bicycle and pedestrian connections, and transit connections were already incorporated into the project to reduce these types of emissions. Despite that, it is inevitable that a project of this type and size will exceed those standards and as there are no additional mitigation measures to apply, the impact conclusion is changed to significant and unavoidable. Special City Council Minutes Page 3 of 9 August 24, 2010