Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Don Mooney <br /> March 29, 2017 <br /> Page 4 <br /> pavement structural section is determined from a Traffic Index (TI) compiled <br /> exclusively from annual truck axle wheel loadings experienced; light duty <br /> vehicles such as motorcycles, passenger cars, pickup trucks and light duty vans <br /> don't count. There is no evidence that the County ever computed the change in <br /> TI caused by the original project or the proposed expansion Project and <br /> compared that to the known structural characteristics of the pavement on Frewert <br /> to determine whether the existing structural section would be adequate or not. <br /> Therefore, the conclusion that payment of standard traffic impact fees will be <br /> sufficient for the county to maintain Frewert Road is unsubstantiated. <br /> Moreover, even if the Impact Fee funds are sufficient for the County to do annual <br /> maintenance to repair the damage to the pavement that the Project's truck traffic <br /> does, the people who live or use Frewert Road will have to live with the nuisance <br /> and damage to vehicles that potholes cause for what might be a considerable <br /> time before the County gets around to doing maintenance and repairs. This is <br /> not to say that the County will not be reasonably diligent in performing <br /> maintance; but it is a quality of life issue that those who live along or regularly <br /> use the road will have to put up with even when the County does do reasonably <br /> diligent maintenance and this does not seem to have been taken into account in <br /> the IS/MND or Planning Commission's deliberations. <br /> Obvious Potential Mitigation Measures Have Not Been Considered <br /> i <br /> An obvious potential mitigation would be to increase the width of the traveled <br /> way to increase separation between large trucks and bicyclists and pedestrians. <br /> Another would be to improve the roadway shoulders to make them more walk <br /> and bike friendly. Neither is mentioned or evaluated, in the IS/MND <br /> I <br /> Conclusion <br /> Based on the above, I am convinced that the IS/MND is inadequate and that the <br /> Board of Supervisors should find in favor of the appellants. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> Smith Engineering & Management <br /> A California Corporation <br /> 1 1 1C 1 R \N110KTAT10N NANAGUNI LN t <br /> 5311 Lown-Road. Union City,CA 9.4187 tel:i10.489.9477 lex: 510.489.947/8 <br />