NOTICE OF WORKSHOP - Laserfiche WebLink

4.Written Comments on the Draft EIR and Responses to Comments compared to the 12,270 total weekday daily trips that would be generated by the EDZ),and would result in the avoidance of some,but not all,of the significant impacts of the proposed EDZ. The volume of traffic trips to the EDZ area that would be generated by this alternative would likely result in impacts related to spillback, and further degrade operations of freeway ramps at merge/diverge areas that are already operating at unacceptable levels. Therefore,the analysis in the Draft SEIR indicates that some significant traffic impacts that would result from the proposed EDZ would still result even under a number of realistic, lower-intensity, alternative development scenarios. Las Positas Interchange as Mitigation for Traffic Impacts Some comments questioned whether increased traffic at freeway interchanges that would result from the EDZ could require or result in the construction of an interchange at Las Positas. This interchange, proposed in the former City of Pleasanton General Plan, was eliminated from the 2005-2025 General Plan that was adopted in 2009. The General Plan Circulation Element states that, should the City Council elect to proceed with an interchange at West Las Positas Boulevard, such approval must be conditioned upon providing a period of up to one year for a potential citizens' initiative challenge to approval of the interchange. Whether increased traffic resulting from the proposed EDZ would prompt reconsideration of this improvement is speculative. Master Response to Comments about Draft SEIR Air Quality Impact Analysis Several commenters requested clarification regarding air quality impacts that would result from the development of the uses within the proposed EDZ and from increased traffic. For a discussion of potential impacts to air quality from implementation of the proposed EDZ, refer to Section 4.B, Air Quality,of the Draft SEIR. The Draft SEIR concluded that regional air quality effects would be significant and unavoidable (see discussions under Impact 4.B-2. traffic-generated emissions of criteria air pollutants, and Impact 4.B-3, obstruction of implementation of the 2010 Clean Air Plan, as described in Section 4.B,Air Quality,of the Draft SEIR). As stated in the discussion under Impact 4.B-3 in the Draft SEIR,the size and scope of development within the proposed EDZ would result in a volume of criteria pollutants that exceed threshold identifed by the region's air district.The proposed EDZ would also slightly increase vehicle miles traveled(VMT)per household and per capita.These two factors resulted in the finding in the Draft SEIR that the proposed EDZ would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Plan.This same situation would likely arise in any nearby community with the introduction of a large retail store that attracts vehicle trips from a relatively large geographic area. Regarding the Draft SEIR's assessment of air quality impacts, it is important to note that these impacts are largely regional in nature, and do not directly affect locations near the area of the proposed EDZ, with the exception of impacts related to Toxic Air Contaminants(TACs),as described below. Air emissions from traffic are addressed by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District largely on a regional basis because traffic generated by a given development Johnson Drive Economic Development Zone 4-12 ESA/140421 Supplemental EIR Response to Comments March 2016