04 ATTACHMENT 17 - Laserfiche WebLink

readers to the Staples Ranch Traflc Report for more detail regarding the potential impacts of the Concurrent Extension under both the Project and the Ice Center Alternative. (ii) Concurrent Extension Impact Number 2 In the second instance, and again with regard to both the Project and the Ice Center Alternative, the Concurrent Extension would generate traffic which would contribute to an unacceptable level of service at an inrersection that would have an acceptable level of service under the Deferred Extension (Intersection No. 32 in the AM and PM peak hour). The Draft EIR identifies this impact as a significant impact of the Concurrent Extension under the Existing Specific Plan Alternative (which, Like the revised project, assumes the Concurrent Extension), and states that the Staples Ranch Traffic Report identifies mitigation measures that would render the impact less than significant. (See, Draft EIR, pp. 5-17 to 5-20, referencing the Staples Ranch Traffic Report for the mitigation measures required to reduce the impact to a less than significant level, which are specified in Tahles 35 and 37 of the Staples Ranch Traffic Report.) This impact therefore does not constitute a "new significant impact' because the impact and its requisite mitigation measure have already been identified in the Draft EIR. B. Impact TR-2. Intersections nat within !'Leasanton. (i) Additional Dublin Intersections The Staples Ranch Traffic Report demonstrates that impacts to additional City of Dublin intersections would be less than significant under the Deferred Extension and the Concurrent Extension. (Staples Kanch 1 raffic Report, page 57). The Concurrent Extension [herefore does not result in a new significam impact. (ii) Concurrent Extension Impact Number 3 The Final EIR indicates that the Concurrent Extension would not alter the level of service rating of any intersections within the City of Livermore (Final EIR, pages 3-22, 3-23). However, based on new information supplied in the Final EIR, the City has disclosed that the Concurrent Extension will result in increased delays at Intersection No. 13 under the AM and PM peak hour for the Project upon full buildout of the El Charro Specific Plan. (Final EIR page 3-22, 3-23, Response to Comment 3.2). The Staples Ranch Traffic Report draws the same conclusion with regard to conditions under the Ice Center Alternative. (See, Staples Ranch Traffic Report, Table 40). As stated in the Final EIR, the same mitigation measure tha[ applies under the Deferred Extension, TR-2.2, would mitigate the delays resulting from the Concurrent Extension. (Final EIR, page 3-22). As with the Deferred Extension, these impacu would remain significam and unavoidable. Because the impact is the same under both the Concurrem Extension and the Deferred Extension, the Concurrent Extension does not constitute a "new significant impact". In addition, the Draft EIR indicates that the Ice Center Alternative would significantly impact Imerseuiun 13 at the cumulative level (Draft EIR, pages 5-37 and>-38.) Under the Ice Center .tllternative the Concurrent Extension therefore would result in an increase in the intensity of an impact at an earlier date than the Draft EIR anticipared with the Deferred N4 R~I2%954v5