My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014/06/18 Council Agenda Packet
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2014
>
2014/06/18 Council Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/11/2020 10:57:17 AM
Creation date
2/11/2020 10:53:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Agenda Packet
Date
6/18/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
135
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
0 <br /> transportation improvements and TDM measures. The City will determine on a case-by- <br /> case basis whether the resulting level of service is acceptable. The City shall maintain a <br /> list of intersections where it has been determined that Level of Service"E" or "F" is <br /> considered acceptable,and will identify the lowest acceptable Level of Service for each <br /> of these intersections. If the adverse impact to level of service is likely to be significant, <br /> a detailed alternative analysis is required (see section 9.5). The City may recommend <br /> alternatives or modifications to the proposed project or may deny.the project if the City <br /> determines that reasonable mitigation measures are insufficient to mitigate the project's <br /> impacts. <br /> 9.5 Detailed alternatives analysis. When the Responsible Official finds that despite the <br /> incorporation of reasonable mitigation measures, the proposal is likely to have a significant <br /> adverse environmental impact on level of service or other aspects of the transportation network, <br /> I the Responsible Official shall issue a Determination of Significance. If the sole issue is traffic, <br /> the applicant shall prepare a limited scope EIS on traffic. If there are other probable significant <br /> adverse environment impacts,the EIS will be scoped accordingly. <br /> The EIS scope with respect to transportation shall contain an analysis of all reasonable <br /> courses of action and mitigation measures, including TDM measures, that would avoid or <br /> otherwise mitigate the probable significant environmental impact related to transportation. On <br /> the basis of this analysis, the Responsible Official, upon review and analysis by the City <br /> Engineer, shall determine whether reasonable mitigation measures are sufficient to mitigate the . <br /> identified significant adverse transportation impact. <br /> • <br /> 9.6 Applicant's options. At any time in the project review process,the applicant may: <br /> • <br /> 1. Choose not to proceed with the project. <br /> 2. Implement measures identified by the City to address the adverse transportation impacts. <br /> • 3. Propose revisions to the project to avoid or reduce the identified impacts and document <br /> the revisions in accordance with the City's project review procedures (including EMC <br /> 20.01.160 if applicable) and section 13 of this chapter. The modifications must be <br /> approved by the City Engineer and the Responsible Official. Possible measures include <br /> van/car pooling programs, pedestrians and bicycle improvements, incentives to <br /> encourage public transportation ridership, or other measures that, in the opinion of the <br /> City Engineer and the Responsible Official,would adequately address the transportation <br /> impact. <br /> 9.7 Table 2 summarizes the requirements for payment of fees for transportation system <br /> improvements to mitigate impacts of proposed projects,as specified in sections 10 and 11 of this <br /> chapter. <br /> • <br /> Table 2: General Requirements for Fees Related to System Improvements <br /> Number of Trips Generated: Level of Service at Horizon Year: Fee Calculation: <br /> -7- <br /> 52 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.