Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CWM:djm 11/06/89 (098/#25) <br />CWM:djm /29/89R <br /> <br />adequately addressed on a project area basis. <br /> <br />Therefore, no mitigation efforts can be put forth to <br /> <br />specifically <br /> <br />address <br /> <br />the <br /> <br />"jobs/housing <br /> <br />balance" <br /> <br />issue. <br /> <br />d. Mitigation Responsibility. Responsibility for <br /> <br />monitoring <br /> <br />these <br /> <br />mitigation <br /> <br />measures <br /> <br />shall <br /> <br />be <br /> <br />assigned at the site specific project level. <br /> <br />4. TRAFFIC. <br /> <br />a. Significant Effects. General Plan buildout of the <br /> <br />Amendment Area could result in a net increase of l745 <br /> <br />per peak hour vehicle trips. <br /> <br />The level of service <br /> <br />would change at 5 of the II study area intersections. <br /> <br />Two of the studied intersections would operate at an <br /> <br />unacceptable Level of Service ("E") or worse. <br /> <br />b. Findings. Traffic problems can be expected to <br /> <br />increase; however, with adequate mitigation, as <br /> <br />outlined below, these problems can be brought to <br /> <br />within an acceptable level. The suggestion that <br /> <br />development should be prohibited or delayed until the <br /> <br />proposed Woodside Viaduct is constructed is rejected. <br /> <br />Were this condition to be imposed upon the Amendment <br /> <br />Area it would operate to achieve the opposite of the <br /> <br />goals set forth by the Second Amendment and the <br /> <br />General Plan, and serve as a "no growth" device. The <br /> <br />construction of the Viaduct is not within the purvue <br /> <br />of the Redevelopment Agency or the City of Redwood <br /> <br />City. <br /> <br />Since the responsibility for construction is <br /> <br />9 <br /> <br />11190 <br />