Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />Reg�iar City �o�ncil Meeting <br />�o�day, JnYy 2�, 20�i <br />Pag� 45 <br />Councilmernber Pus� noted the original concerns raised in �arious <br />comments rega�-ding v�g�tatzon, wai�r quality and runo£f; and opined <br />�hat those concerns were addressed io her satis�action. Councilmem- <br />ber Pust adv�sed that her only remaining concern was tzming of traffic <br />m�tzgation strategies and triggering mechan�sms, a.s we�l as cos�- <br />sharing for �araff e mitiga�zon. Councilmember Pust sought clarifica- <br />tion inr �he basis of emission statemen�s and other iiems identifzed in <br />undexly�ng reports, as referenced on page 5, paragraph 26 of college <br />responses 1:o agency cornments. <br />11 S�eve EImer, TKDA Consuiting, Narthwestern Col�ege T�°a�'�c <br />12 Engineer <br />�3 Mr. Elmer addressed various micara-modeling and �raff c sz�nulating <br />� 4 software used in traffic analysis to determine emission outpu�s and <br />15 pollutanis zn specifc maintenance zones and inc�usion of the data in <br />�.6 the EAW appendix based on those reports. <br />17 <br />18 Addiiional dzscusszan ensued on m�tigatio� measuxes planned and up� <br />19 grading of exisiing condiiions in various seenarios; and timzng o� pro- <br />20 posed mitigation. <br />2 �. <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />3 �. <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />Councilmembar Pust op�ned that upon coznp�et�on o� the college's <br />immedia�ely proposed improvements, she anticipated mztigat�on fox <br />increased tra�f c generation a� �hat �ime, not �en years �ater. Cnuncil- <br />znember Pust c�ar�fzed that, z� she vvere to vote �n �avor o�the negative <br />declaration for an EIS, her expectations were that ihe college undex- <br />stooci that ii they were seeking io increase the traffie prob�em in th� <br />neighborhaod �hat she �xpected them �o participate totally in the solu- <br />tion; not just mznzma� solutions. <br />Mr. Paschl�e noied �hat backg�ound tr��'fic considera�ions were in- <br />cluded in mitigat�on, noi jusi college expansion; hawever, noted -�hat <br />the PUD would solidify triggering mechanisms for improvements. <br />35 Mr. Schwartz concurred, and not�d �hat the �raffie modeling scenarios <br />35 used assume many dif£erent backg;round g�owth cons�de�at�ons, and <br />37 included growth assumptions related ta Twin Lakes redevelopment as <br />38 well and zmpacts to tra��c in the area; and may be �rigger�d based on <br />39 �heir garowth alone (i.e., Lydia at Faiarview}. Mr. Schwaxtz opined that <br />