Reso 2004-082 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

POTENTIALLY ISSUES POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT IArPACT SOURCES ISSUES MITIGATION IbIPACT INCORPORATED EXPLANATION: The project site is located within an urban context on an arterrar roaaway, ana was uunzeu as a ~~~G ~~a«~,~, which triggered sporadic emergency siren noise. According to data contained ul the City's General Plan, the project site is withni " the 65-70 dB Ldn (decibel, day-night average level) noise contours. The 65-70 dB Ldn level is considered "normally acceptable far convnerciaUoffice uses. Short-terns construction-related noise impacts can be expected from the project site. Due to the fact that these noises are typically intermittent and occur over a short period of time, and due to the City's standard conditions of approval linuting the hours of construction, noise impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. The project is not located within an area govenied by an airport land use plan (either conmlercial or private.) 10. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would th e ro'ect: a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial u1 relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a X 2 substantial increase in either the number of velucle hips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or con estion at intersections ? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the X 2 county congestion management agency for desi ated roads or hi hways? c. Result in a change in air traffic pattenrs, including either an increase in traffic levels or X 6 a change iu location that results in substantial safe risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp cun~es or dangerous X 2 intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm e ui ment ? e. Result in made uate ewer enc access? X 2 f. Result in made uate parkuz ca acs ? X 2 g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation X 2 (e. ., bus turnouts, bic cle racks)? h. Trigger CMA Review? (GPA involving more than 100 p.nr. peak how- hips generated over X 2, 6 existin eneral ran land use) EXPLANATION: The proposed project was reviewed by City Engineering and Transportation Department staff, and it was concluded that due to the relatively small size, the project would not result in impacts to existing transportation systems, nor require any off-site transportation improvements. An estimated 14 PM peak hour trips would be generated by the proposal, per calculations provided by the City's Transportation Division. As proposed, the project would have a single pourt of ingress from Davis Street, with onsite one-way circulation leaduig to a driveway exit on Davis Street, and right-in/right-out only fuming movements. The applicant will be required to fill in the concrete median on Davis Street to preclude left turn movements into the site, and to provide one bicycle rack on the site. As proposed, the parking for the office use does not meet City standards (32 spaces are required and 28 spaces are proposed). The reduction in parking will be considered as part of the Plaruned Development approval. Staff supports the reduction ar parkuig due to the small size of the development and surgle user/oanrer occupant of the larger building. Potential transportation/circulation impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered go~~ernmental facilities; need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable sen~ice ratios, response times or other erformance ob'ectives for an of the ublic services: a. Fire rotection? X 2 b. Police rotection? X 2 c. Schools? X ~ 1016-1052 Davis/ PLN2004-00031 -Initial Study Checklist 9 Apri12004