Laserfiche WebLink
salted open wound. <br />6) Text on page 4.11-23 ends abruptly one-third of the way through the page, during a <br />discussion about freeway ramp queuing, after stating that all the Options (A,B,&C) result <br />in <br />unsatisfactory queues but not significant only because there is not a standard for <br />significance. The next sentence starts, "However, Option", stops there, and leaves the <br />bottom two thirds blank. A very diligent reader finds that the text picks up with "C" seven <br />pages later on 4.11-30, where it states something important- Option C would have the <br />most <br />significant impact on freeway queues. This is a key finding about Option C, which is lost <br />to <br />all but the most diligent reader due to the formatting. The DEIR should be re -issued with <br />the <br />formatting corrected so that readers have the opportunity to understand and comment <br />on <br />the impact of Option C. <br />Section 4.11.7 Cumulative Impacts concludes that the cumulative impacts are not <br />significant, <br />but omits that the basis for that conclusion is that the level of service without the <br />projects is <br />already unsatisfactory in 2020 and 2040. This is an illogical conclusion. Bad traffic can <br />most <br />certainly be made worse. Professional Planners and elected officials have a <br />responsibility to <br />make our cities better, not to continue to approve development knowing it will make <br />quality of <br />life worse for the current residents. The DEIR should be reissued with cumulative <br />impacts <br />compared to 2020 and 2040 conditions clearly addressed. <br />Submitting DEIR Comments Page 8 <br />4.9.8. (Should be 4.11.8) Regulations. Adopted goals for intersection and roadway <br />level of <br />service provide the framework for approving or disallowing new development to reduce <br />potential impacts. Allowing unsatisfactory level of service to get even worse with no <br />mitigation <br />is in conflict with the adopted goals for level of service. <br />4.9.9 (Should be 4.11.9) Mitigation. This mis-numbered section says in one line that <br />traffic <br />impacts are less than significant and mitigation is not required. The discussion through- <br />out <br />Section 4.11 says that level of service on the surrounding freeways will be unacceptable <br />in 2020 <br />and 2040. Concluding that no mitigation is required is not logical. Bad traffic can most <br />certainly <br />be made worse by bad planning. Professional Planners and elected officials have a <br />