Attachment B <br />would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive <br />plan; or <br />(C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is <br />otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or <br />comprehensive plan. <br />The proposed map amendments do not change the functional classification of a transportation <br />facility or change the standards implementing a functional classification system. Therefore, the <br />amendments do not have a significant effect under (a) or (b). <br />In regards to (c), the type of development currently permitted through the existing plan designation <br />and zoning will change for the subject property. As detailed in the following findings, the applicant's <br />analysis indicates that: (A) the types and levels of travel and access are consistent with the functional <br />classification of existing transportation facilities; (B) none of the transportation facilities studied will <br />be degraded beyond their identified performance standard identified in TransPlan as a result of the <br />proposed amendments; and, (C) none of the existing transportation facilities are otherwise projected <br />to fall below the performance standards identified in TransPlan. <br />To address the TPR, the applicant submitted findings and a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA), <br />dated April 24, 2015, which was prepared by the consulting firm of Branch Engineering, Inc. Staff <br />clarifies that this is not a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Review pursuant to EC 9.8650, although one is <br />expected to be provided at the time of a new development application. The TIA responds to <br />comments from the City provided during the application completeness review process. The TIA <br />evaluates the current performance of impacted transportation facilities, the performance of these <br />facilities in 2027 with the proposed amendments and the performance of the facilities in 2027 <br />without the proposed amendments. Since there are no transportation facilities planned for the study <br />area, the applicant's analysis considers the impacts on only the existing transportation facilities within <br />the study area. <br />Comparison of Existing and Proposed Land Uses <br />In comparing the existing and the proposed land uses, the applicant's TIA assumes in both scenarios <br />that the area currently used or platted as cemetery will remain cemetery. For the unused portion of <br />the property currently designated POS and zoned R-1, the applicant's TIA uses regional park as the <br />existing land use and uses a "reasonable worst-case" scenario of single-family housing limited to five <br />homes per acre (per the South Hills Study policy) for the proposed use (Table 3 of the TIA). <br />According to the applicant's TIA, the number of PM peak hour trips projected to be generated by <br />development allowed under the reasonable worst case scenario are as follows: <br />Rest-Haven <br />Projected PM Peak <br />Projected PM Peak <br />Difference <br />Memorial Park <br />Trips Existing <br />Trips Proposed <br />between land <br />POS designation & R- <br />LDR designation & <br />use trips <br />1/PL zone <br />R-1 zone <br />Existing land uses: <br />Cemetery <br />23 <br />Findings - 6 <br />PC Agenda - Page 12 <br />