Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

Upp scoping session presentation 4 4-2019

627 vues

Publié le

Onni Christie Mixed-Use Project Scoping Session presentation

  • Soyez le premier à commenter

  • Soyez le premier à aimer ceci

Upp scoping session presentation 4 4-2019

  1. 1. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. ONNI CHRISTIE MIXED-USE PROJECT City of Emeryville Public Scoping Session April 4, 2019
  2. 2. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. PRESENTATION OVERVIEW  Provide overview of proposed project  Review CEQA process  Review draft EIR scope  Review Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) metric  Receive comments on the draft EIR scope 2
  3. 3. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. PROJECT SITE 3
  4. 4. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. PROPOSED PROJECT  Demolish existing 1-story, 44,000-square-foot building  Retain 7-story commercial building (Wells Fargo)  Develop:  54-story residential tower with 638 units  15-story office tower  0.5-acre park  NOP Corrections:  638 units (not 628)  Units could be rental or ownership  15-story office tower (not 16)  638-feet-tall residential tower (not 683) 4
  5. 5. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. EIR INITIATION  City determined that EIR is required  Purpose: serve as an informational document for public agency decision-makers and the public  Lead Agency: City of Emeryville  City’s EIR Consultant: Urban Planning Partners  Project Sponsor: Onni Group 5
  6. 6. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. CEQA PROCESS 1. City decided to prepare an EIR and issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) on March 20, 2019 2. 30-day NOP/scoping comment period (March 20, 2019-April 19, 2019) i. Scoping Session: April 4, 2019 3. Draft EIR Preparation & Publication (~Fall 2019) 4. Public Review of Draft EIR (45 days) 1. Including Planning Commission public hearing for verbal comments on Draft EIR 5. Final EIR/Responses to Comments Preparation, Publication, & Certification (~Early 2020) 6. Consideration of proposed project (~Spring 2020) 6
  7. 7. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. NOTICE OF PREPARATION 1. City sent Notice of Preparation (NOP) on March 20, 2019 to State Clearinghouse 1. State will distribute to relevant reviewing agencies 2. In addition, City directly notified following agencies: 7 • San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) • San Mateo County Airport Land Use Committee • Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission • AC Transit • BART • EBMUD • CalTrans
  8. 8. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. SCOPE OF EIR The NOP proposes that the EIR analysis will focus on the following issues: • Aesthetics (Wind and Shade/Shadow) • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy • Geology, Soils, and Seismicity • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Hydrology andWater Quality • Land Use and Planning • Noise • Public Services and Utilities • Traffic and Transportation 8
  9. 9. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. SCOPE OF EIR Effects anticipated to not be significant (with incorporation of standard conditions of approval): • Agricultural and Forest Resources • Mineral Resources • Population and Housing • Recreation 9
  10. 10. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. WHAT IS SIGNIFICANT? Under CEQA, a significant effect is defined as a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment 1. Conduct impact analysis 2. Compare to established thresholds of significance 3. Determine if impact is significant 4. Identify potential mitigation measures for significant impacts 10
  11. 11. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. TRANSPORATION IMPACT ANALYSIS  Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) vs. Level of Service (LOS)  Robert Rees, Principal, Fehr & Peers 11
  12. 12. INNOVATION BY WhatisVMT? 12
  13. 13. INNOVATION BY WhatisVMT? 13
  14. 14. INNOVATION BY SB743 Mobility Accessibility What SB 743 Does - Eliminates LOS/Delay as metric to identify a significant environmental impact - Adds Vehicle Miles of Travel as the metric to evaluate a projects transportation impact 14
  15. 15. INNOVATION BY SB743 What SB 743 Does Not Do… No change to general plans, traffic impact fee programs, State Constitution, subdivision map act, etc. 15
  16. 16. INNOVATION BY Guidelines • Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) recommends VMT as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts • OPR recommends that VMT should be used everywhere in the State • Land use projects within ½-mile of major transit may be presumed to have a less-than-significant transportation impact if specific project criteria is met • Transit, bike, and pedestrian projects should be presumed to have a less-than-significant transportation impact 16
  17. 17. INNOVATION BY VMT FORECASTINGMethods VMT = Volume x Distance or Trips x Trip Length • OPR guidelines offer three basic methods for VMT quantification: • Activity-Based Models • Trip-Based Models • Spreadsheet Methods 17
  18. 18. INNOVATION BY OTHER CONSIDERATIONSMethods • Mixed Use Projects • Unique Projects • Redevelopment Projects 18
  19. 19. INNOVATION BY REDUCE TRIPS OR TRIP LENGTHMitigation • Improve transit access • Increase access to common goods & services • Provide affordable housing • Improve pedestrian or bicycle network • Orient project towards transit, pedestrian or bicycle networks • Provide traffic calming • Provide bicycle parking • Provide transit passes • Provide car sharing • Worksite amenities (showers, bicycle lockers) • Develop Transportation Demand Management Plan 19
  20. 20. INNOVATION BY • Improve transit access • Increase access to common goods & services • Provide affordable housing • Improve pedestrian or bicycle network • Modify project design to orient towards transit, pedestrian or bicycle networks • Provide traffic calming • Provide bicycle parking • Provide transit passes REDUCE TRIPS OR TRIP LENGTHMitigation Project Alternatives • Locate project in area with low existing VMT • Locate project near transit • Increase project density • Increase mix of uses within project or project surroundings • Increase connectivity and/or intersection density on site 20
  21. 21. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. ALTERNATIVES  Range of reasonable alternatives  Feasibly attain a majority of the project objectives  Avoid or substantially lessen significant impacts of the project  No specific alternatives have been identified at this point 21
  22. 22. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. CUMULATIVE The EIR will address the impacts of the project development along with other known, approved, or reasonably foreseeable development activity in the City and region. 22
  23. 23. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. EIR SCOPING COMMENT PERIOD  The 30-day comment period ends April 19, 2019  Comments can by submitted:  Tonight (orally or in writing)  By email to mdesai@emeryville.org  By mail or hand-delivered to: Attention: Miroo Desai, Senior Planner City of Emeryville Planning Division 1333 Park Avenue Emeryville, CA 94608 23
  24. 24. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. NEXT STEPS  Consultant team and City complete Draft EIR  45-day public review and comment period  Including Planning Commission public hearing for verbal comments on Draft EIR  Consultant team and City prepare responses to comments and Final EIR  Final EIR includes comments received on Draft EIR, responses, and any changes to Draft EIR  Planning Commission considers and certifies the Final EIR  Following certification of the EIR, the Planning Commission will consider approval of the project 24
  25. 25. URBAN PLANNING PARTNERS INC. KEY INFORMATION NOP Comments can be sent to Miroo Desai,AICP, Senior Planner, at: mdesai@emeryville.org Or: City of Emeryville 1333 Park Avenue Emeryville, CA 94608 25

×