<br />Staff Report on Appeal MAJ Eugene Polk Street (TIA 21-2 and ARA 21-14) Page 9 of 18 <br /> <br />Regarding sub-issue f., the appellant’s quote from the decision about mitigation measures is found <br />at the bottom of page 9. The decision states on page 7 that increased traffic resulting from the <br />development is not anticipated to contribute to problems in the area based upon accident rates, <br />traffic volumes or speeds that warrant action under the City’s traffic control program based on <br />documented pedestrian or bicycle safety concerns. <br /> <br />Additional Comments on Appeal <br />The applicant addresses Issue 6 in engineer Janet Jones’ response letter focusing on this issue (see <br />Attachment K) as well as the applicant’s attorney letter on page 6 (see Attachment F). Staff <br />concurs with the analysis they provide. <br /> <br />a. The City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program, Fiscal Years 2022-2027 (CIP) was <br />reviewed for scheduled transportation projects within the study area and none were <br />identified. The City’s Transportation System Plan (TSP) are improvements that are planned <br />long-range and are not typically funded and therefore may never occur. In any event, if <br />funded, there is no reason why striping would not address any issues with the bike lane <br />crossing a site access. <br /> <br />b. Review of impacts at the West 8th Avenue/Polk Street intersection were not required, per <br />R-9.8650-F.1. which states that the analysis must include all intersections which will be <br />impacted by 50 or more additional peak hour trips. The West 8 th Avenue/Polk Street <br />intersection was estimated to be impacted by fewer than 50 peak hour trips, as reviewed in <br />the scoping process, and was therefore not included in the study area. <br /> <br />c. The proposed pass-by trip reduction was originally scoped with City staff and approved, per <br />an email dated April 6, 2021 provided in Appendix B of the TIA. Additionally, City staff have <br />noted that formal review comments were provided by Public Works staff and are included <br />as part of the official record. <br /> <br />d. The proposed trip reduction for the previous bank was originally scoped with City staff and <br />approved, per an email dated April 6, 2021 provided in Appendix B of the TIA. The former <br />bank was in operation at the time of the 2018 counts which were adjusted accordingly for <br />2021 conditions and utilized in the TIA; therefore, removal of former bank trips from the <br />proposed project’s trip generation ensured that site traffic was not double counted. <br /> <br />e. As noted in the response above for 6b., the only intersections that are required for <br />analysis, per the City’s requirements, are those estimated to be impacted by 50 or more <br />peak hour trips. The proposed study area was documented in the TIA scoping letter <br />(Appendix B of the TIA) with trip assignment at nearby intersections. The City’s <br />confirmation of the study area was also documented in Appendix B of the TIA. <br /> <br />f. As the TIA noted, all study area intersections are projected to meet the City’s minimum <br />level of service standard of LOS E. The TIA did not state that inadequate queuing stack will <br />increase backups on West 7th Avenue, but rather that there are existing queuing <br />deficiencies on West 7th Avenue that are projected to worsen with future traffic growth.