View: Project Documents
| Agency | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
PCD Project Manager
8/29/2022 3:39:56 PM |
Planning Division has no comments. | 8/29/2022 3:39:56 PM | |
|
PCD Engineering Division
8/29/2022 10:52:18 AM |
Review # 2: Comments Resolved. Reviewed by: Gilbert LaForce, PE |
8/29/2022 10:52:18 AM | |
|
PCD Project Manager
6/21/2022 8:32:50 AM |
Planning division has no comments | 6/21/2022 8:32:50 AM | |
|
PCD Engineering Division
6/15/2022 10:02:41 AM |
1. The short horizon analysis (2026) on Table 7 shows LOS at certain legs of Mesa Ridge/ Wayfarer, Mesa Ridge/Autumn Glenn (stop controlled) and Mesa Ridge/Marksheffel (stop controlled) worsen with inclusion of project traffic compared to background traffic (Table 2). The TIS needs to provide recommendation on how to mitigate for any LOS below D. 2. Section III of the TIS (pg 12) merely states "Background traffic includes traffic generated by development of vacant parcels in the area". This statement needs to be expanded/elaborated so the report clearly identifies which parcels were considered in generating the background traffic. Per previous comment, the TIS should include a reference section to document the vacant parcel traffic studies in the area that were incorporated to generate the background traffic. 3. Table 8 shows signalization of Mesa Ridge/Wayfarer, Mesa Ridge/Autumn Glenn and Mesa Ridge/Marksheffel will improve the LOS in the long horizon analysis (2041). TIS noted "No additional improvements are recommended at this time" and City to continue monitoring. Per previous comments the TIS should calculate their proportional traffic impact to these intersections and provide their fair share escrow for these future signal if the City is not requiring signal improvements to be installed at this time. Reviewed by: Gilbert LaForce, PE gilbertlaforce@elpasoco.com |
6/15/2022 10:02:41 AM | |
|
PCD Project Manager
1/11/2022 10:31:55 AM |
Planning Division has no comments. | 1/11/2022 10:31:55 AM | |
|
PCD Engineering Division
1/5/2022 5:07:49 PM |
1. No Drainage comments. The MDDP is proposing five regional full-spectrum detention facilities to mitigate the developments drainage impact. The County request the City provide future referrals to review subsequent preliminary and final drainage report to verify no adverse impacts to surrounding unincorporated EPC properties. 2. The County request that this development determine and calculate it's fair share contribution for future signal at Mesa Ridge Pkwy and Spring Glen Drive similar to what has been requested of Corvallis Development. 3. Expand on the background traffic narrative. Were the recent Traffic Impact Study for Corvallis Development and Glen at Widefield incorporated in the Mesa Ridge study? Add a reference section and list other traffic studies in the area of studies. State whether the current study is consistent with those studies and explain any discrepancies. Reviewed by: Gilbert LaForce, PE gilbertlaforce@elpasoco.com |
1/5/2022 5:07:49 PM |
EDARP