SU0012814 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee, as required by Public Works Condition of Approval Condition 2(e), with the submission by the applicant of annual production records, is sufficient to mitigate Impact 9-3 to a less than significant level, and no additional mitigation is required. SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 9-4: "Under all future and future plus project conditions northbound and southbound left turns operate below LOS "D" as shown in Table 9-6. A LOS below"D"is unacceptable to Caltrans and the County. This condition will exist under all future traffic conditions. Adding additional traffic from the project will further impact the LOS." . u FINDING: Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR- STATEMENT OF FACT: The Board of Supervisors finds and declares that Impact 9-4 is significantly overstated, for reasons which are outlined below. As a result, the Board rejects as unnecessary and infeasible the mitigation measures requested by the California Department of Transportation, except as expressly set forth in these findings or the Conditions of Approval. f First, the Board finds that the Level of Service projections in the Final EIR for southbound Bird Road at State Route 132 are irrelevant for purposes of this project, inasmuch as no project-related traffic is expected to make this turning movement. As related to northbound Bird Road at State Route 132, the Board notes that the primary reason for the level of service degradation is, and will continue to be, existing and future commuter traffic on State Route 132. In addition, based upon the testimony of the applicant and others, the Board finds that virtually none of the projected trips from the project will make the left turn movement onto State Route 132 during the PM Peak Hour, which represents the only time at which the Bird Road/132 intersection LOS is projected to degrade below LOS "D". Second, the Board notes that the future traffic volumes and Level of Service projections in the Final EIR are predicated upon unrealistic assumptions of the aggregate project. market, which in tum skew the projected number of vehicle trips from the p )ect. According to the written testimony of the applicant's consultant, Cambridge Systematics, which in turn relies upon the projections of the State of California Division of Mines and Geology, it is more accurate to estimate the 2015 market demand for aggregate at approximately 6 million tons per year, which equates to approximately 2000 daily truck trips. This is also consistent with the projections in the County's Draft Vernalis Project Financing Plan, prepared by Economic and Planning Systems. The Board notes that the Final EIR's for both this project and the Vernalis Interchange Project estimated nearly 5600 daily truck trips by 2015, which equates to nearly 18 million tons per year. As a result of the more accurate projections of the aggregate market, the Board finds that the Vernaiis Interchange EIR's projection of 5600 daily truck trips is unfounded_ (Cambridge Systematics Report, Vernalis Interchange Financing Plan) 4 f