Resolution 09487CITY OF ALAiMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 9487
APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
FERNSIDE EXTENSION PROJECT AND FINDINGS OF FACT
THEREON AND AUTHORIZING IMMEDIATE ACQUISITION
OF RIGHTS OF WAY
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA that
said Council hereby approves the Environmental Impact Report for
the extension of Fernside Boulevard and the following finding
of fact thereon-'
1. The Draft and the Final Environmental Impact Reports
have been completed in compliance with the California Environ-
mental Quality Act and the Alameda Guidelines adopted pursuant
thereto.
2. The City Council has reviewed both documents.
3. The City Council has reviewed the report of the Acting
City Engineer attached hereto.
4. The only significant impacts which may result from the
project are (a) increased noise by 1990 during peak hours
(assuming the worst case); (b) school safety; (c) view changes
for two houses and (d) a change in perception of the neighborhood
by residents,
5. All those mitigating.maasures recommended by the Acting
City Engineer's report shall be incorporated' into the Fernside
Boulevard extension project, with State approval where; necessary.
6. Ce
not feasible:
'gating
easures suggested by the EIR'ar
(a) Fencing of properties would achieve no immediate
or short term benefits. Noise levels are now and will be
too low for an undeterminable period of time for fencing
to achieve noticeable results. Significant noise will
not develop for some years (if ever).
(b)
side o
making
Several vacant lots will be created on the we
the finished street These lots will. be developed
fencing there unnecessary.
(c) The three lots which are too small to develop
should be integrated with surrounding' property by consoli-
dating parcels. It is too early to tell what use can be
made, of them.
(d) Fencing the front of houses is impractical. I
would require blocking living room windows.
(e) Air conditioning and sealing techniques, like
cing, are not cost effective. If the worst case were
0 occur, noise would' not be greater.` than what is found
other residential areas of the City, nor. would
-1-
th
Fe
we
exceed unacceptable criteria for residential development
under the Noise Element. Change will be gradual and not
perceived as a sudden increase in noise which residents
are not accustomed to hearing during peak hours.
(f) Appropriate measures for school safety will be
taken pursuant to the mechanisms already established.
Walks and signals will be employed as elsewhere according
to accepted criteria. It is impractical to determine the
full extent of these measures before the, street is
operational. Safety is an ongoing matter. The project
will reduce safety problems on other streets which school
children must also cross.
(g) Concrete road surface is too expensive for the
benefits _involved i.n its ability to accumulate smaller
amounts of contaminates than asphalt. The cost of concrete
here is not justified. BCDC and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers will evaluate drainage. Virtually all other
streets ih Alameda are asphalt
(h) Nothing can be done about visual perceptions other
than those landscaping and similar matters already incur
posted in the project.
7. Wit
project, spec
ide corridor,
e the significan
bout the mitigation measures th
ally improved traffic circulat
} significant enough to warrant
1pacts not mitigated hereunder
benefits of
on in the
approval
to occur.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said Council certifies that it
has reviewed and considered the information contained in the
"Draft EIR, Fernside Boulevard Extension, City of Alameda,
November 12, 1980" and "Final Environmental Impact Report;
side Boulevard Extension, City of Alameda, January 23, 198':
which documents constitute the Iinal EIR for the Fernside Boulevard
Extension project, and further certifies that said Report has been
completed in compliance with CEQA and state guidelines,
BF IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the extension of Fernside
aulevard is hereby approved and the City Engineer is directed to
prepare plans and specifications therefor and the City Attorney
is directed to acquire the necessary rights of way as soon as
possible.
CI OF
EIk
Inter-department Memorandum
.JANUARY 14, 1981
To: CARTER STROUD, CITY ATTORNEY
From: DAVE EDWARDS, ACTING CITY ENGINEER
SUBJECT: FERNSIDE BOULEVARD EXTENSION, MITIGATION MEASURES
The mitigation measures as outlined in the draft EIR of Fernside Boulevard
Extension have been reviewed and the following is recommended:
Reference 'Mitigation Measure
Summary of
Principal Findings
- page 5
(Transportation Signalize intersection
& Circulation) of Fernside & Otis.
Enforce 25 mph on
Fernside.
Noise Rebuild fences for
houses along extension.
Noise-page 5
1.1,n rz n
11?z U
Add air conditioning &
seal rooms facing on
Fernside extension.
JAN 14 1981
City Attarrtetts Min
CITY OP" ALAMEDA
Recommendation
Include in contract if agreeable
to Caltrans & meet warrants.
Enforce as necessary.
3 lots would be created that are
too small to develop: southwest
corner of Encinal, southwest corner
of Washington, southwest corner of
Fillmore. The other lots would be
developed after the street project
is completed & could be designed
accordingly. These new structures
would buffer the existing houses.
The wood fence would coseabout
$9/ft. or approximately $900/lot.
Fences are not recommended in areas
where the adjacent lots could be
developed. The remaining 3 lots
listed above would depend on the
use & development of the small
adjacent residual land.
Within this area there are 1451
existing houses. These all-vary
in design & construction type. Any
work would have to be designed for
the specific house--some would
require special work to add double
glazing--sealing, painting, &
adding air conditioning would vary
in cost. It is estimated that an
average cost including design,
permits, inspection, etc. would be
$10,000 each. For the benefit, it
does not seem economically feasible
& is not recommended.
Carter Stroud, City Attorney
Reference
Visual-page 6
page 7
page 7
page 42
page 42
page 44
page 56
Air Quality
-2- January 14, 1981
Mitigation Measure
Recommendation
Landscape & texture wall Recommended.to be included in
adjacent to 985 & 987 contract.
Market St.
Landscape closure of
Peach St.
This area is under Caltrans'
jurisdiction & is designated
freeway. The area is 17,000 sg.ft.
& at $2/sg.ft. = $34,000,including
removal of existing pavement. This
area should be studied to determine
its best use. Possibly developed
by adjacent property owners or
separately.
Too costly to be included in project
relative to the benefits. Possible
separate project.
Landscape along project. Street trees are being proposed
within the R.O.W.
Restripe the south leg
of the High St. &
Fernside intersection.
To stripe an exclusive
right turn lane for
westbound traffic on
Fernside.
To reduce the potential
for pedestrian-vehicle
conflicts, flashing
yellow signals, & signing
could be installed as
advance warning of the
crosswalk adjacent to
Lincoln School.
Dust control as a
provision of the
contract.
It is recommended that this inter-
section be studied later after
traffic patterns have been
established. It would be studied
with a recommendation through the
Managers Traffic Advisorg Committee
similar to the studying of any
intersection that has an observed
problem.
This again would be reviewed by
the Traffic Advisory Committee as
necessary.
Pedestrian counts have been taken
in this area & the consultant will
include a specific recommendation.
The crosswalk would be adequately
signed & marked as part of the
project.
This is recommended under standard
procedure.
Carter Stroud, City Attorney
Reference
page 57
page 67
Construction
Noise
pages 75 & 76
Geology & Soils
page 82
Hydrology
page 88
page 99
Schools
-3- January 14, 1981
Mitigation Measure Recommendation
To control road dust impacts This would be similar & would
along Fernside Blvd by be incorporated into the
regular sweeping or flushing. sweeping program.
There is a maintenance pro-
cedure established for the
sweeping of all City streets.
To limit the hours of
construction between
7:30 & 5 p.m.
That all equipment should
be required to have
mufflers which are ade-
quately maintained.
To mitigate the dis-
placement of animals, it,
is proposed that the
.adjacent vacant land be
protected.
Regular street cleaning
to help maintain the practice.
water quality of San
Leandro Channel.
It is recommended that this be
included in the specifications.
This is standard specification
item.
The recommendations of the soils
engineer would be included in the
specifications for the project.
The various items listed for surface
drainage would be included in the
specifications based on the recom-
mendation of the soils engineer.
The installation of the roadway &
development of the adjacent
properties, if any, would reduce
the amount of uncontrolled motor-
cycle & automobile traffic in these
outlying areas. This would then
allow vegetation to become established.
This would be normal maintenance
Parking accessibility There currently exists curb cuts &
to the school yard, i.e. access to the parking lot.
curb cuts, could be
considered.
Carter Stroud, City Attorney
Reference
page 104
Lighting
page 109
Bicycle Path
-4- January 14, 1981
Mitigation Measure
That efficient lighting
system be used.
Under the Bay Farm
Island Bridge--should
be completed as soon as
possible.
Recommendation
High pressure sodium lights will be
included in the project.
This is also agreeable and this
project would be implemented as
funds become available.
TDE:sm
cc: Acting Planning Director
Environmental Impact Planning Corporation
319 llth Street, San Francisco 94103
J, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed h» the
Council of the Ci ty nf Alameda i n regulnr meeting assembled
on the 17th of February, 1981 , hv the fol 1 owi ng vote, to wi t:
AYES : COUnci 1m2n Diament, Sherratt, Stone, Tillmnn, and
President Cori ca - 5.
NOES : None..
ABSENT: Nonc,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
the Official seal of said City this 18th day of February, 1981 ,
next City MA
-y of Alameda