MO 2002-016 to 2002-020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

POTENTIALLY ISSUES POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT UNLESS SIGNIFICANT IMPACT SOURCES ISSUES MITIGATION IMPACT INCORPORATED C. A substantial permanent increase in X 2 ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in X 2 ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? e. For a project located within an airport land use X 2. 7 plan, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private X 2,7 airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? EXPLANATION: The project site is located within an urban environment and future development would be in conformance with development standards. During construction, elevated noise levels are anticipated. The City imposes standard hours of construction with issuance of building permits. Impacts related to noise are anticipated to be less than significant. The project is not located within an area governed by an airport land use plan (either commercial or private). 10. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the r6ect: a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial X 2 in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? J. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a X 2 level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, .X" 2, 7 Including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design X 2, 7 feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X 2 f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X 2 g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or X 2 Programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? h. Trigger CMA Review? (GPA involving more X 2 than 100 p.m. peak hour trips generated over existing GP EXPLANATION: The proposed zoning change was reviewed by City Transportation Division staff, and it was concluded that due to its relatively small size, the zoning change and any subsequent development project would not result in significant impacts to existing transportation systems, nor require any off -site improvements. Off-street parking is being proposed to mebt City standards. Potential transportation/circulation impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. 555 Estudillo - Initial Study Checklist g December 2001 (Formrev. 11 /06/00) 2-^