My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02867
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2800
>
pf_02867
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 12:17:50 PM
Creation date
12/8/2004 1:22:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2867
Planning Files - Type
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Address
2660 CIVIC CENTER DR
Applicant
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/TWIN LAK
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
320
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />G. Everest Development L TD <br /> <br />1. Everest states that the traffic analysis is incomplete in failing to include traffic forecasts and <br />capacity analysis for the 1-35W South Ramps/Long Lake Road intersection and the Long Lake <br />Road/County Road C intersection. <br /> <br />Response: The 1-35W west ramps at Long Lake Road and the Long Lake Road at County Road C <br />intersections were not analyzed because the regional travel model indicates that very little Twin <br />Lakes site generated traffic is expected to travel through these intersections. Traffic to and from the <br />north on 1-35W is expected to use the County Road D ramps and these intersections were included <br />in the analysis. <br /> <br />Traffic from the south on 1-35W is expected to use the East Ramp Terminal intersection at Cleveland <br />Avenue, and this intersection was included in the analysis. Traffic to the south on 1-35W is expected <br />to travel through the Cleveland Avenue / County Road C intersection, which was also included in <br />the analysis, and then enter the freeway via the free flow loop from County Road C. <br /> <br />Therefore, all key intersections that are expected to provide access between the site and the regional <br />road system were included in the analysis. <br /> <br />2. Everest states that the traffic analysis fails to acknowledge and analyze traffic problems resulting <br />for travelers bound for destinations west of 1-35W on County Road C as a result of the proposed <br />removal of the northbound exit loop ramp from 1-35W. <br /> <br />Response: The traffic analysis did in fact consider the removal of the northbound 1-35W exit loop <br />to westbound County Road C. The forecast northbound to westbound volume was added to the <br />intersection volumes at both the East Ramp Terminal intersection at Cleveland and the Cleveland <br />intersection with County Road C. <br /> <br />The analysis indicated that even with the increased traffic caused by the elimination of the loop, <br />adequate intersection operations can be provided if right turn lanes are added on each approach to <br />each intersection. <br /> <br />3. Everest states that the air quality analysis is inadequate in failing to model predicted CO <br />concentration acknowledging the combined impact of the Centre Pointe Business Park and Twin <br />Lakes Business Park. <br /> <br />Response:The air quality analysis conducted for the Twin Lakes EA W, as presented in the response <br />to Question #23, was based on the traffic analysis representing conditions in the Year 2011, which <br />assumed full development of both Twin Lakes and Centre Pointe. <br /> <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.