HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 94-284 10/17/1994 ~esolUtl®n No. 94-284 N ~.5.
1 of the City of Petaluma, California
2
3
4 CERTIFYING, APPROVING AND ADOPTING
5 THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL. IMPACT REPORT FOR TILE
6 RAINIER AVENUE EXTENSION AND INTERCHANGE PROJECT
7
8 WHEREAS, the City of Petaluma's General Plan has historically identified the need for a
9 new cross-town connector and interchange to accommodate the projected population,
10 support the designated land uses, meet transportation level of service standards, and
11 provide a convenient, efficient transportation system that meets the public safety, economic
12 development, housing, and transportation goals and objectives stated in the Plan.
13
14 WHEREAS, the City of Petaluma's 1987 General Plan designates the appropriate location
15 of the new connector and interchange at Rainier Avenue on the Circulation Map and
16 further describes the improvement in the Transportation Element.
17
18 WHEREAS, a Preliminary Plan Line Study was prepared by McKay and Somps Engineers
19 in April 1985 for the Rainier Avenue Overcrossing which evaluated five potential
20 alignments for the extension of Rainier Avenue from McDowell Boulevard to Petaluma
21 Boulevard with two potential interchange configurations.
22
23 WHEREAS, only two of the alignments did not require condemnation of existing buildings,
24 displacement of businesses and residents and disruption of other land uses. The two
25 alignments not requiring condemnation of existing uses were recommended for further
26 study and presented to the City Council and concurrence given during a duly noticed
27 Council study session on August 12th, 1985.
28
29 WHEREAS, in May 1985 a Traffic Study of the Rainier Avenue Overcrossing was
30 prepared by TJKM Transportation Consultants which evaluated seven alternatives for a
31 new connector and freeway interchange improvements including: no connector or
32 interchange; provision of a connector only at Rainier Avenue; a connector at Rainier
33 Avenue with partial interchange improvements at two locations -Corona Road and/or
34 Rainier Avenue; a connector at ..Rainier Avenue with full interchange improvements at
35 Rainier Avenue or Corona Road; and a connector at Rainier Avenue with additional
36 improvements to the existing interchange at E. Washington Street.
37
1
Res. No. .......9.4-2. p.4..... N.C.S.
1 WHEREAS, the 1985 Traffic Study further demonstrated that neither partial interchange
2 improvements nor additional interchange improvements at E. Washington Street would
3 meet the City's transportation objectives to relieve traffic congestion along the E.
4 Washington Street corridor and provide acceptable levels of service at buildout of the
5 General Plan.
6
7 WHEREAS, this study demonstrated that a new connector and a new full freeway
8 interchange is needed to substantially meet transportation level of service standards. Full
9 interchange improvements at the extension of Rainier Avenue were recommended and
10 presented to the City Council with concurrence given during a duly noticed Council study
11 session.
12
13 WHEREAS, the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) prepared a Project Study
14 Report dated November 1988 on the interchange component of the project which provided
15 a conceptual plan for the interchange that meets State design criteria.
16
17 WHEREAS, an Initial Study was completed by City staff in April of .1987 and revised in
18 August 1990 and a Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was
19 distributed to all responsible, federal and trustee agencies involved in the project and to the
20 State Clearinghouse on August 21, 1990 in accordance with Section 15082 of CEQA
21 Guidelines.
22
23 WHEREAS, City staff hosted four public scoping and information meetings on March 28,
24 1988, September 5, 1990, February 28, 1991 and January 29, 1992 as permitted under
25 Section 15086 of the CEQA Guidelines. A scoping report was prepared and provided to
26 the Planning Commission to assist in evaluating the adequacy of the Draft EIR.
27
28 WHEREAS, City staff hosted three interagency consultation meetings on April 16, 1991,
29 April 25th, 1991 and May 10, 1991 with representatives from State Department of
30 Transportation (Caltrans), Metropolitan Transportation Commission, State Department of
31 Fish and Game, and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District to solicit input on the
32 scope of the EIR.
33
34 WHEREAS, following the scoping meeting a number of other alternatives were identified
35 for a new connector and interchange and all of these alternatives were evaluated by City
Reso. 94-284 NCS
2
1 staff for technical feasibility and ability to substantially meet the project objectives as stated
2 in the General Plan.
3
4 WHEREAS, a staff report dated January 1992 was prepared and made available for public
5 review which presented the results of this evaluation and recommended that two feasible
6 alternatives for a new interchange be evaluated in an EIR at Corona Road and at Rainier
7 Avenue; and, that of the two alignments proposed for further study on the extension of
8 Rainier Avenue, only one of the alignments was potentially feasible.
9
10 WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared under contract with EIP Associates and completed
11 July 1993 which evaluated two project alternatives for a new cross-town connector and
12 interchange.. The Draft EIR was distributed to all responsible, trustee and federal agencies
13 involved in the project and to the State and Regional clearinghouses along with a Notice of
14 Completion. A Notice of Public Hearing and Availability of the Draft EIR was published
15 in the local newspaper and mailed on July 9th, 1993 to the residents/property owners in the
16 areas potentially affected and to all interested parties who requested such notice, pursuant
17 to Section 15087 of CEQA Guidelines and Sections 12.5 and 12.6 of local Environmental
18 Review Guidelines.
19
20 WHEREAS, a Biological Mitigation Plan and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
21 Program were prepared in September 1993 in accordance with Section 21081.6 of the
22 Public Resources Code (AB 3180). These documents were distributed to federal and state
23 responsible and trustee agencies and Notice of Public Hearing and Availability of these
24 documents was mailed on September 3, 1993 to all interested parties who requested such
25 notice and residents/property owners in the areas potentially affected, providing
26 opportunity for comment at the public hearing.
27
28 WHEREAS, a public hearing before the Planning Commission was held on August 10,
29 1993 and continued to September 14, 1993 for consideration of public comments on the
30 Draft EIR, Biological Mitigation Plan and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
31 at which time all individuals, groups and agencies who desired to comment were given the
32 opportunity to speak and/or submit written comments as required by the City's
33 Environmental Review Guidelines. The statutory 45-day public review period on the Draft
34 EIR was extended from August 23, 1993 and was officially closed after the public hearing
35 on September 14, 1993.
Reso. 94-284 NCS
3
1 WHEREAS, staff conducted an interagency field review meeting with representatives from
2 State Department of Fish and Game, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control
3 Board, and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service on October 26, 1993 to discuss comments on the
4 Draft EIR and solicit input and response on the proposed Biological Mitigation Plan and
5 Mitigation Monitoring Program pursuant to Section 15086 of CEQA Guidelines and
6 Section 10.0 of local Environmental Review Guidelines.
7
8 WHEREAS, a Response to Comments/Final EIR document was prepared which
9 adequately responded to the comments raising environmental points and was circulated to
10 local, state and federal agencies on March 8th, 1994. The Response to Comments
11 document did not change any of the data or conclusions of the Draft EIR and no new
12 significant effects were noted that had not been evaluated previously in the Draft EIR.
13
14 WHEREAS, a notice of availability of the Response to Comments/Final EIR document,
15 including notice of the Planning Commission meeting and the public hearing scheduled
16 before the City Council, was published in the local newspaper and mailed on March 8, 1994
17 to residents and property owners in the areas potentially affected and to all interested
18 parties and commenting agencies, as provided in Section 15089 of CEQA Guidelines.
19
20 WHEREAS, the Final EIR was presented to the Planning Commission and after due
21 consideration on March. 22, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended certification of
22 the Final EIR. and approval of the project with mitigation measures and monitoring
23 program as conditions of approval.
24
25 WHEREAS, the City Council, as the decision-making body, held public hearings on the
26 project and provided opportunity for comment on the Response to Comments/Final EIR
27 on August 1, 1994 and on September 12, 1994.
28
29 WHEREAS, after all persons were given an opportunity to speak the City Council closed
30 the public hearing and directed staff to prepare responses to comments on the Final EIR
31 received during the public hearings and to provide additional information regarding a
32 partial project to construct the connector as an overcrossing only or phasing of the
33 proposed project to defer construction of the interchange to a later date. An updated cost
34 estimate and financing plan was also requested, along with information regarding the
35 preliminary results of the Origin/Destination Survey for the intersection of E.
Reso. 94-284 NCS
4
1 Washington/McDowell. Discussion on this item was continued to their regular meeting on
2 October 3, 1994.
3
4 WHEREAS, staff prepared Responses to Comments on the Final EIR and provided
5 additional information regarding the potential effects of phasing of the proposed project or
6 approving only a partial project, updated cost estimates and financing plan, and,
7 preliminary data on the destination survey. This information was made available to the
8 public and distributed to the Council for consideration and further direction at their
9 meeting on October 3, 1994.
10
11 WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed this information and determined that. the connector
12 only would not meet the objectives of this project to relieve congestion on E. Washington
13 Street, provide improved access to the freeway, and meet the transportation, land use,
14 public safety, housing, and economic development goals, objectives and policies as stated in
15 the General Plan and accordingly would not be a feasible project alternative and would not
16 clearly lessen the significant effects of the project. This information reaffirmed Council's
17 previous determinations made in response to the 1985 Rainier Avenue Traffic study,
18 General Plan Circulation Studies, Corona/Ely Specific Plan studies, and in a staff report
19 dated January 9, 1992 regarding the scope of alternatives to be studied in the project EIR.
20 WHEREAS, phasing the proposed project would ultimately have the same environmental
21 effects and benefits as the Proposed Project that were evaluated in the project EIR.
22 Potential for new significant effects related to increased carbon monoxide concentrations
23 during the interim period was evaluated and found not to be significant if the project were
24 to be phased (connector only during the interim period). Potential for traffic impacts to
25 occur during the interim period would be substantially reduced to a level of insignificance
26 by the identified mitigation measures to link future interchange improvements to
27 substantial development through the required Master Plan already committed to by the
28 City. Therefore it was determined there would be no new significant impacts related to
29 phasing the proposed project.
30 WHEREAS, recirculation of the EIR is not necessary because no new significant
31 information was added to the EIR after public notice was given of the availability of the
32 Draft EIR.
33
Reso. 94-284 NCS
5
1 WHEREAS, the additional information provided in response to comments on the Final
2 EIR, does not substantially change the project or provide for new significant effects related
3 to the project that were not previously evaluated in the project EIR that was circulated for
4 public review.
5
6 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby incorporates as
7 an Addendum to the Final EIR. the staff report entitled "Response to Comments on the
8 Final EIR and Analysis of Partial or Phased Project Alternatives" report dated September
9 1994 which evaluated the option of phasing the proposed project or constructing the
10 connector only.
11
12 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council reviewed
13 and considered the documents which constitute the Final EIR along with the Addendum to
14 the EIR and hereby certifies, approves and adopts the Final EIR documents and makes the
15 following findings:
16
17 1. Based upon the foregoing facts, the Final EIR consist of the following documents
18 has been completed in compliance with the intent and requirements of the
19 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and
20 the City of Petaluma Environmental Review Guidelines:
21
22 a. Draft Environmental Impact Report, July 1993;
23 b. Draft Biological Mitigation Plan, September 1993;
24 c. Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, September 1993;
25 d. Response to Comments/Final EIR, February 1994;
26 e. Addendum to the Final EIR -Response to Comments on the Final EIR and
27 Analysis of Partial and Phased Project Alternatives, September 1994
28
29 2. The above referenced documents which constitute the Final EIR were presented to
30 the City Council and considered along with both written and oral comments
31 received during the public review period on the project and environmental
32 documents.
33
34
35 Reso. 94-284 NCS
36
6
. .
1
2
3 3. The Final EIR reflects the independent ,judgement of the City of Petaluma and
4 represents an adequate documentation of the environmental implications and
5 possible mitigation measures of the proposed Rainier Avenue Extension and
6 Interchange project for use in decision-making.
g exhibta~jb-24
Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City.
REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Approved as to
Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) (iX~~xdd~ meeting fO~'
on the ----1-~tZl---•---...._ day of _........U~tob~r 19.4._, by the
following vote : E - -
y -
Cit Attor ey
AYES: Parkerson, Read, Shea, Vice Mayor Sobel, Mayor Hilligoss
NOES: Hamilton, Barlas
ABSENT: None ~ ~
p
ATTEST: ...-.~.'~..~..r..-'~~~C%~~i ..Uyv.-.
City Clerk Mayor
Gbuncil File..-.-
cn io-ss aes. ~0...9.~.-2.$~...NC~.c.s.