Laserfiche WebLink
L • r <br /> • <br /> 1 Section 8: The analysis shall also include applicable sections of <br /> 2 Appendix "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein, as well as <br /> 3 other items unique to the particular development being reviewed. <br /> 4 Section 9: Transportation System Impact Mitigations <br /> 5 A. The analysis shall include a proposed mitigation plan. The <br /> 6 mitigation may be either the construction of necessary transportation <br /> 7 improvements, or contribution to the City for the development's fair share <br /> 8 costs of identified future transportation improvements. <br /> 9 B. For those development proposals which will generate fifty (50) or <br /> 10 more additional (new) peak hour (inbound and outbound) trips from the site, <br /> 11 the mitigation costs attributable to the proposed development shall be the <br /> 12 summation of the development's costs associated with the following two types <br /> 13 of facility improvements (inclusions of County and State facilities shall be <br /> 14 subject to appropriate interlocal agreements): <br /> 15 <br /> 16 1 . On transportation facilities where the need to construct <br /> mitigation to a facility is directly related to the developments <br /> 17 traffic and would not be required at the horizon year if the <br /> development was not constructed, the cost for the mitigation will <br /> 18 be entirely borne by the development. In the event the Traffic <br /> Engineer identifies more than one development under simultaneous <br /> review, cumulative impacts and distribution of mitigation costs <br /> 19 may be considered; and <br /> 20 2. On transportation facilities where the need to construct <br /> 21 improvements, by the horizon year, to a facility would be needed <br /> regardless of the proposed development, the adverse traffic <br /> impacts of the development will be considered mitigated by a <br /> 22 contribution of a share of the costs for the improvements based <br /> 23 on the developments percentage of: the total peak hour traffic <br /> trips at the horizon year on the facility less existing peak hour <br /> 24 traffic volumes. <br /> 25 Section 10: Upon completion of the traffic impacts analysis and <br /> 26 approval by the City's Traffic Engineer, the project proponent has the <br /> 27 following options: <br /> 28 A. Not to proceed with the project; <br /> 29 B. Modify the project to avoid or reduce the identified impacts. <br /> 30 The appropriateness of measures which may reduce impacts must in each case <br /> 31 be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. Such possible measures include <br /> 32 <br /> 5 <br />