Laserfiche WebLink
RNVIRONMliNTAL IML'AUT REYOR'r AUU[NUUM -ARMSTRONG RANCH. REYLirO PROJECT' <br />irPTUMGER ally - SANTA -ANAL CALIPORNrA <br />2.16 <br />TRANSPFIRTATiONTR'AFFIC <br />Nn <br />Ah"L <br />MS.WA.anl <br />i'Vi d lfre profeCr: <br />\iAM&.0 <br />Impac[ <br />Severe <br />Impact <br />Ct6NEe faun <br />IYeAoni Aaalyaii <br />(�) <br />Cause an lacrease in traffic which is substantial in relationto' <br />the existing'trratlic load mid capacity of'tilLstrect sysicm (Le„ <br />result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />trips, the volume to capacity ration cin roads; or congestion at <br />intersections)? <br />(b) <br />Exceed, either individuallyorcul ukdivcly, a level of service <br />standard established by the county congestion management <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />apency for designated roads or highways? <br />(c) <br />Result in a changz in air traffic-patternsJucluding either as <br />increase in traffic levels or a change: in location that results in <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />substantial safety risks? <br />(d) <br />Substantially increase hazards due to -a design feature (e. g,,. <br />sharp cun�es or dangerous intcrscetions) or. ine'ompatible uses` <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />(e. =:,.farm a ui nuent)': <br />e) <br />Result in inadequate emergency access? <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />M <br />(1) <br />Result ininadequate parkingcapacity? <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />M <br />(g) <br />Conflict with adopted policies` supporting alternative <br />❑ <br />®' <br />transportation (e.., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? <br />Analysis of Project Changes: <br />a) Vehicle trips (list would be gbhcratcd fin a daily basis thrd [shout construction would derive from <br />construction workers and delivery of construction materialS:4\dditional vehicle trips generated <br />during construction could increase congestion on local strects-l-lowever, the majority, of <br />construction workers are anticipated'to arrive and depart outside the peak traffic hours, while <br />delivery trucks would arrive and depart throughout the day. Construction would be required to <br />comply with Mitigation Measure TR -I from the Cerlifted FIR, which requires development and <br />implementation of a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) to identify truck: routes, situ <br />access, truck queuing locations, undboustruction times to minimize traffic impacts, particularly <br />during peak hours. Witli:impledtetitalion of a CTMPI construction [raffle impacts would be <br />reduced to less than significant. The Certified LIR also conbludcd that with,impleruentation of <br />Mitigation Measure TR -1, construction traffic impacts would be reduced to less than significant. <br />The Revised Project reduces the size orthe Church, Parish Center, Parish Ilall,,and meeting <br />rooms within the project area compared to the project analyzed in the Armstrong Ranch <br />Development Project Environmental Impact Report (1 -HP Associates, lune 2002) and adds 42 <br />single family dwelling units. As'shown in the trip generation comparison prbvided in Appendix 13 <br />the proposed project is anticipated to result in fewer added trips to the circulation system than <br />previously analyzed. Specifically, the project would produce 278 fewer trips on a typical <br />weekday, 75 fewer trips daring the a.m. peak hour, 42 fewer trips.during'the puff. peak hour; and <br />231 fewer trips during the peak hour of trip generation on a Sunday. <br />The Armstrong Ranch DevelopntenrProject EIR identified significant traffic impacts resulting <br />from the proposed project's contribution of traffic in the Existing (2001), Future Year (2007), and <br />Horizon Year (2025) conditions and presented mitigation measures for those impacts. A'review <br />I':1511016Ua1;\JJenJum'vldJem7um:J«s Uv1U5?I7 <br />75B-115 <br />2-66' <br />