Amador County – Part of the consent agenda of today’s Amador County Transportation Commission meeting includes a commission response to the city of Plymouth Draft Traffic Impact Study. Plymouth requested comment on Draft Environmental Impact Report as part of its city General Plan update and ACTC Executive Director Charles Field responded in a letter to Plymouth City Planner Paula Daneluk. The response said that ACTC was “concerned that in the process of carrying out the mitigation measures identified” in the draft traffic study and EIR, that “the city may find that some of the transportation improvements listed will prove to be infeasible or un-fundable.” Field also worried about the city’s “Level Of Service” self-grading system and recommended using ACTC’s standard of doing so. The letter also pointed out that the California Environmental Quality Act allows for “Statements of Overriding Consideration” in missing required levels of service for road projects, in the event that Plymouth expects that it may approve projects that could create worse than standard levels of service. Field also concurred with Amador County Department of Public Works comments on Plymouth’s Draft Traffic Impact Study and requested “that these comments be addressed through appropriate revisions in the Final TIS.” The letter said ACTC staff worried that “several study intersections will operate at unacceptable level-of-service conditions if the proposed land use element is built out under cumulative conditions.” Field also pointed out that “ACTC staff has questions related to the city’s plan for actual implementation of the mitigations identified” in the draft traffic study and in the “city’s plan for monitoring the application of the General Plan policies.” The comment said that “without enforceable mandates as directed by the city council, the recommended actions identified as mitigation measures in the DEIR are only advisory in nature and do not ensure adequate mitigation of impacts.” Field recommended creating implementation measures and corresponding monitoring programs of the city general plan, to “define a clear path toward reaching its goal of reducing and mitigating the transportation impacts that may result form adoption of its General Plan Update.” Story by Jim Reece (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).
Wednesday, 21 January 2009 01:43
ACTC To Respond To Plymouth Draft Traffic Impact Study
Amador County – Part of the consent agenda of today’s Amador County Transportation Commission meeting includes a commission response to the city of Plymouth Draft Traffic Impact Study. Plymouth requested comment on Draft Environmental Impact Report as part of its city General Plan update and ACTC Executive Director Charles Field responded in a letter to Plymouth City Planner Paula Daneluk. The response said that ACTC was “concerned that in the process of carrying out the mitigation measures identified” in the draft traffic study and EIR, that “the city may find that some of the transportation improvements listed will prove to be infeasible or un-fundable.” Field also worried about the city’s “Level Of Service” self-grading system and recommended using ACTC’s standard of doing so. The letter also pointed out that the California Environmental Quality Act allows for “Statements of Overriding Consideration” in missing required levels of service for road projects, in the event that Plymouth expects that it may approve projects that could create worse than standard levels of service. Field also concurred with Amador County Department of Public Works comments on Plymouth’s Draft Traffic Impact Study and requested “that these comments be addressed through appropriate revisions in the Final TIS.” The letter said ACTC staff worried that “several study intersections will operate at unacceptable level-of-service conditions if the proposed land use element is built out under cumulative conditions.” Field also pointed out that “ACTC staff has questions related to the city’s plan for actual implementation of the mitigations identified” in the draft traffic study and in the “city’s plan for monitoring the application of the General Plan policies.” The comment said that “without enforceable mandates as directed by the city council, the recommended actions identified as mitigation measures in the DEIR are only advisory in nature and do not ensure adequate mitigation of impacts.” Field recommended creating implementation measures and corresponding monitoring programs of the city general plan, to “define a clear path toward reaching its goal of reducing and mitigating the transportation impacts that may result form adoption of its General Plan Update.” Story by Jim Reece (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).
