|
<br />TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS: Santa Clara School Site Redevelopment
<br />
<br />PAGE 36 OF 36
<br />
<br />,V..v..v..v"v........,..,"-""'............F,"'...'.,"v--.........,V.V, ~"'''~''';>;~x,,~~ ~~~".,..,..~,o<.""':+'..,.,.,<,,:."'''~...,,;'''.,,:<,,>;'''',,.,....'''.-';;,,~.........M.,oM3.,............"'...._..r,..'.-....,.,'...'....,.._.'..._"...v.v.v."...:,"";."..~:...+'.,.:"v".":._~.,",...,,..:' ;.;.,y;...~.M..-'"......r_".y_.v....'.....'.v.-........._......_.......-.&,....,....,'~.:.,~.,.,.~,.:.,,'"",.....,."":o..;+;..,.v. .;o".q...~y.. u.....".,......-"h..NV,~^.V.. ,..^..,............
<br />
<br />OAR 660-12-060(1)(c)(A) is not applicable, as the increased vehicle trips generated by the
<br />proposed zone change and plan amendments were not found to cause types or levels of travel or
<br />access that would be inconsistent with the functional classification of any transpoliation facility.
<br />
<br />OAR 660-12.060(1)( c )(B) is applicable, and is satisfied, as the proposed zone change and plan
<br />amendments were not found to reduce the performance of an existing or planned transpoltatiol1
<br />facility below the l11inimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP.
<br />
<br />OAR 660-12~060(1) (c) (C) is applicable, as the proposed development is projected to worsen
<br />the perfol111ance of a transportation facility (Hunsaker Lane/River Road ti'affic signal) that is
<br />already projected to perfOlm belov>, the mobility standard.
<br />
<br />As indicated above, the Hunsaker Lane/River Road tramc signal will be significantly effected as
<br />defined in OAR 660~ 12.060(1) (e). Therefore, OAR 660-12-060(2) is applicable and subsection
<br />(e) is satisfied, as the proposed development will include "minor transpOltation improvements"
<br />as a condition of development.
<br />
<br />OAR 66{)~12-060(3) allows local governments to approve amendments that \VOlIld significantly
<br />aUcct an existing transportation facility provided the following subsections are met:
<br />
<br />OAR 660-12-060(3) (a) is met, as the applicable facility is already perf<.m.-ning below the
<br />minimum acceptable mobility standard.
<br />
<br />OAR 660-12-060(3) (b) is met, as there are no plaru1ed transportation h-lCilities that \vou1d be
<br />adequate to achieve consistency with the identified perfon11ance standard.
<br />
<br />OAR 660-12-060(3) (c) is met, as the proposed development \;>.,'ill mitigate the traffic impacts to
<br />avoid further degradation of the bcility.
<br />
<br />O/d~ 660-12-060(3) (d) is not considered applicable, as the subject property is not within one-
<br />half mile of an existing or plalmed interchange on an interstate highway.
<br />
<br />OAR 660- J 2-060(3) (e) is not considered applicable, as ODOT has detennined that no state
<br />highways \vitI be af1ected by the proposed deve10pment.
<br />
<br />Conclusion
<br />In summary, the proposed developlnent is not projected to cause significant adverse impacts to the
<br />adjacent transpOliation system, provided the recommended mitigation measures are implemented.
<br />
<br />i@J:~.2:.~~.!Jl__h~.!~H.i~i.~:~~Xing, .fne:
<br />
<br />August 28, 2007
<br />
|