G-202 Cook 8-15-22 To: Development Review Commission
From: RJ Cook
Subject: LU 22-0002 Testimony-
To: Development Review Commission
Rassekh parkS
cher Area Rec.Complex Dam New Golf Course 9 hole executive
Multi-sport field about to Burstl Extended Driving range
5kateparkel Fence screening
Picnic Pavilion ` Maintenance Building
Large PlaygroundWalking pathway •
11
j. + ./ y
-77e,, J. z
e+ as
1 ;`2eh� \P-� 1 P^e q..E.„ n
Ce\, r sej,` e
/C' `''vs'o��'Y� e
F/P6 j ofZ °�
1Z,
Os o
Aquatic Center
' Competition pool w/spectator seating
New Rec. Center11‘) ` Recreational pool
Locker rooms, Renova ed Clubhouse
storage,P& R I�` - Additional Rec.program space
dept. offices, Public equipment rentals
fitness center, (i` Special events center,( •
gymnasium, y.� public meeting space •
ancillary __10:
r oms,
.:. Y 1t4
Trying to make this as easy as possible for DRC, but have struggled in doing so.
So, main points- (will try and find appropriate code, ordinances, to fit concerns.)
• If the Golf Clubhouse will not be used for anything dealing with the golf course but addition to Rec Center
WHY is it not part of LU22-0002 application? If because of two different lot designations, it's additional
use needs to be accounted for in traffic and parking studies somewhere. Check-in to Golf will be at part of
Rec. Center Building which is LU 22 0002 application. (Sign in for golf moved out of clubhouse and
Maintenance building will be on the south side of the Aquatic and Rec. center, so lot location doesn't
matter I would assume)
• What are the "approved uses" for the reconfigured clubhouse at the GOLF COURSE project? What
impacts have not been accounted for in traffic and parking studies? What does the clubhouse renovation
contract state about use?
• Why has Parks and Rec. Staff, Design teams, City staff misrepresented the fact
that the clubhouse - which is being renovated and WILL BE USED as part of the Rec. Center facility?
Wondering why NO ONE had any knowledge, or even acknowledged at any of the hearings that the
clubhouse was indeed going to be reconfigured and used as additional recreation space and events center.
(see documents below)
• Will there ever be an open discussion in regards to the Accumulative Impacts of new designed golf course,
Aquatic Center, Rec. Center, Rassekh Park in an open hearing as stated in previous design team comments?
• What are the fixes, corrections to the issues and miscommunications. Haven't found the code #yet!
These are the major concerns of not only myself, but many from the Palisades Neighborhood Association,
Stafford Hamlet, Stafford Tualatin Valley CPO. I'm just one of the lucky ones that feel most impacts of the
developments all within % mile of one another in the area.
So, here are documents and comments that will support ask for denial of LU 22 0002.
Astounding fact, I was only one that seemed to know about the clubhouse plan, and questioning of that
went unanswered at 7/18/22 DRC meeting? It makes some of us wonder what other omissions,
misstatements, poor documentation or just poor oversite by Parks and Rec., City Staff, numerous design
teams, Board and Commissions are out there or were just overlooked, dismissed in the process of these
applications. Brought up in this testimony for the reason it could have impacts on accumulative traffic and
parking counts that would impact traffic decisions in other Parks and rec. developments in area (ITE
counts/suggested results- not law just suggestions)
Link to Development Review Commission 07/18/2022 meeting video for reference if needed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMtmDMPnKVY
Asked numerous times, yet all denied or were uninformed about renovation taking place.:
1. E. Fransted "Raised issues that, one commenter talked about using the facility for weddings,
meetings and special events. I could not find anywhere in the record where the applicant
proposed to use the facilities for those types of uses."
2. Chair Arthur "Well are we in this application being asked to make decisions relating to the existing
clubhouse?
E. Fransted- "The clubhouse will remain as is. There will be no changes to the clubhouse."
3. Chair Arthur. "So, we are not being asked to make any opinion on that the existing clubhouse?"
E. Fransted —"No!"
4. Chair Arthur. "Could you comment on the usage that's anticipated for the existing clubhouse
particularly as it relates to parking and traffic impacts? I understood at times those were, the
facility was used for social events or maybe that was just something that was discussed in the
past. I'm understanding
that this application there is no anticipation of social events or receptions or parties will be held
there?
Ken Rehms-that is correct. There's no anticipation for that with the clubhouse.
Chair Arthur, and that's been the history in recent times?
Ken Rehms- I can't speak to that, cuz I haven't use it enough or been around it enough.
5. Rick Cook: "Interesting comment, I don't know if Mr. Powers is still there, Bruce did I just dream
this or was there actually a comment at neighborhood or one of the taskforce meetings, that
stated the city was looking hard at moving the clubhouse or the sign in sheet to the Rec. center
and using that clubhouse as, to use for weddings, meetings and special events? So, that would
be another question."
(No response from anyone at July 18th hearing)
But did receive this email back the next day,
From:Powers,Bruce<bpowers@ci.oswego.or.us>
To:'Rick Cook'<rickjcook@frontier.com>;Haggart,Kyra<khaggart@ci.oswego.or.us>
Sent:Tuesday,July 19,2022 at 01:52:12 PM PDT
Subject:RE:Couple of questions
Hi Rick,
1.The playground is slightly larger than the Skatepark,with the Skatepark at 10,000 SF
2. and the Playground with adjacent landscaping at roughly 14,500 SE.
3.Golf check-in will take place in the LORAC lobby.The existing clubhouse will function
4.as additional recreational space and small event space.
5.The project will go to bid once we are through land use approval.
6.Regards,
7. Bruce
How is it possible for something that was advertised (as early as April 8th) in a Bid Management System
Document, also used in Parks and Rec. Summer and Fall catalogs that mentioned "clubhouse renovations"
not be address in any application brought forward to DRC, included in applications etc.? (Document below)
And more importantly, how will this be fixed and by whom?
Should have been counted in Traffic and Parking studies that could possibly have impacts? Additional
classes, meetings, weddings, recreational equipment rental to list a few suggested uses of the renovated
clubhouse" in numerous P & R documents and advertisings. It has NOTHING to do with the Golf Course
operation once finished. What are the "Official" uses for the clubhouse- IS IT LEGAL?
Bid Document Municipal Golf Course Clubhouse Renovation Exhibits City of Lake Oswego Bid Management
System
https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/bids/rfp/municipal-golf-course-clubhouse-renovation
E
#� a Bid Management System
Login Search Bids and RFPs Bid/RFP Calendar My Dashboard City of Lake Oswego Home » Municipal Golf
course Clubhouse Renovation
Municipal Golf Course Clubhouse Renovation Summary
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Municipal Golf Course Clubhouse
Renovation Contractor Services
NOTE: ATTENDANCE AT PRE-PROPOSAL MEETING IS MANDATORY
NOTE: The deadline for questions has been extended to Friday,April 29, 2022. All questions or requests
for clarification should be submitted through the bid management website.
Please Note: No Contractor is to be onsite without prior permission from the Project Manager. Contact
Kyra Haggart at 503- 697-6576.
The City of Lake Oswego ("City") invites submission of Proposals in order to select a qualified Contractor to
provide Contractor Services for the renovation of the Municipal Golf Course Clubhouse. Contractors are
invited to demonstrate their experience and qualifications in performing work directly related to the
services required by responding to this Request for Proposals (RFP).
Anticipated Schedule: The following is the anticipated timeline for receiving and evaluating Proposals and
awarding a contract to the most qualified Proposer. This schedule is subject to change and additional time
as needed.
RFP Open for Proposals—April 8, 2022 Deadline to Request Clarification or Addenda —April 18, 2022
Deadline to Issue RFP Clarifications or Addenda—April 22, 2022
.Deadline for Submission of Proposal: Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 2:00
PMhttps://www.ci.oswego.or.us/bids/rfp/municipal-golf-course-clubhouse-renovation
2/4 Mandatory Pre-Proposal Meeting—April 22, 2022 (10:30 AM) Deadline to Receive Proposals— May 5,
2022 (2:00 PM) Issue Notice of Intent to Award Contract— May 13, 2022 Deadline for Submission of
Objections to Intent to Award — May 20, 2022 Award of Contract* —June 7, 2022
Issue Notice to Proceed —June 10, 2022
AND, how many months before this document was sent out were decisions made and why not part of
applications?
Smacks of the same, "do it till we are caught," scenario, i.e. current violations at Luscher Farm." Seem to be
a reoccurring theme with the city.
Additional traffic and parking use should be included in applications, not omitted by applicant, city, or
overlooked by DRC, even though the proper questions were asked by DRC, but given incorrect answers.
What are the steps to correct this perceived intentional planned omission by applicant?
Must an appeal be submitted, or is there a process for us all to come to some sort of
agreement for mitigation of omission?
The fact that at the DRC hearing, numerous people were asked about this very question and misguided
statements like, "could not find in the application", "there will be no changes to the club house", "No
anticipation of activities at clubhouse" were given and accepted as fact. Which are totally inaccurate and
misleading statements?
So, I guess that since we cannot change the record, no process to rebut the rebuttal, how do we hold the
applicant accountable and make any correction without having to appeal the decision?
The only thing we've ever asked for was an open, honest, dialogue with Parks and Rec., City Council, staff,
design teams, boards and commissions.
Many feel it has become a "reactive not a pro-active" process.
Many area residents are very disturbed by the way things are moving forward. i.e. Statements that a
"Discussion of the accumulative impacts" of these developments will be had at DRC in up-coming hearings.
**WHEN, will those discussion be taking place? Can/will someone please address this?
From Rassekh Park Design team:
4. Questions about the traffic analysis,associated street improvements,and access location
Response:The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), Exhibit F-005 to the staff report, assessed the cumulative impacts of the
proposed development of Rassekh Park and the Lake Oswego Recreation and Aquatics Center(LORAC).The LORAC project
and the Municipal Golf Course renovation proiect.which will be reviewed at separate DRC hearines. will also look at
cumulative impacts.While public testimony states that traffic counts were completed in 2020,the Rassekh Park TIA is,in
fact,based on traffic counts collected in February 2022,at which time school was in session and traffic had resumed more
typical patterns after prior reductions due to the COVID-19 pandemic.The analysis concluded that all studied intersections
will operate at an acceptable level of service. Furthermore, no queuing concerns were identified during peak hours.
Therefore,there is no nexus to require off-site street improvements.
Even members of the DRC have voiced their surprise that nowhere has there been discussion about
accumulative impacts of all the development occurring in the region. Stating because of the "piecemealed"
approach is a major concern. It just doesn't make sense. DRC commissioner during July 18th hearing.
I for one do not want to have to wait for the funding portion with the City Council to correct this or spend
time and money on an appeal.
What is DRC's procedure to correct this? No accountability for misleading DRC and public about
"renovation" and uses of "former clubhouse. Listed below is the False, misleading, or just ill-informed
statements made at 7/18/22 DRC meeting.
Documentation of omitted clubhouse facts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMtmDMPnKVY
Regarding: Conditional Use Modification for Site Modifications to replace existing 18- hole public golf course
with a 9- hole course LU 21- 0076 Lake Oswego Municipal Golf Course Renovation 17525 Stafford Road City
of Lake Oswego,
Dear Chair Arthur and Commissioners: On behalf of the Lake Oswego Parks & Recreation (LOPR) project
team, we would like to offer responses to the additional public testimony received between July 19— July
25, 2022, regarding the Lake Oswego Municipal Golf Course Renovation project (LOMGC). Many comments
were already previously provided, discussed, and answered as part of the July 18th Development Review
Commission Meeting. Subject discussion and responses are identified below. "Once the LORAC is
developed the clubhouse will no longer serve as the site of golf check- in and will instead serve the
primary purpose of providing additional programming space for small recreational classes or meetings,
with a possible secondary purpose of providing rental space for small events...."
Sincerely, Ken Rehms, PE Civil Engineer
Never has been document, vetted or presented in any applications for consideration!
So, why is this part of the golf course application and not LORAC? this or was there actually a comment at
neighborhood or one of the taskforce meetings, that stated the city was looking hard at moving the
clubhouse or the sign in sheet to the Rec. center and using that clubhouse to use for weddings, meetings
and special events? So, that would be another question."
(No response from anyone at July 28th hearing)
Information was known LONG before hearings or reports, testimony, applications were submitted.
Print documentation of Knowledge of Clubhouse Renovation.
Comments stated in the Park and Rec. Summer and Fall catalog postings. Had to be at printers long
before any reports / meetings were finalized and applications submitted I will assume!
COMING SOON! Catalog in LO homes —August 6
POWERED BY PARKS & RECREATION PARKS PROJECTS
jra4403„,,,,.,,,,,,,
? ,f emsiLAKE OSWEGO MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE - . � ®° 90 Pj
RENOVATION
�•0,'� of „ /'
The Golf Course and Driving Range are currently closed for j •'.?fit b 4 pi
renovations.The updated facility will include a 9-hole executive ,,p ro 9po ,
course eligible for USGA Handicap Rating;an extended and j V ,ys9. °
updated driving range;and a new maintenance building. �• , �o °",
The existing Golf Course Clubhouse is also being renovated "R; f E
to include additional programming space for creation �� �e _[� Boa
opportunities and public eau(Dfnent rentals.This project is \ � g
expected to break ground in the summer of 2022. N3 r' +,�,
O
Conceptual renderin of the future
Lake Oswego Pubilc Golf Course
LAKE OSWEGO MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE RENOVATION
The Golf Course and Driving Range closed in November 2021 for renovations and construction of the new
recreation and aquatics center. The renovated golf course will include a 9-hole executive course;
an extended and updated driving range; and a new maintenance building. The existing clubhouse building
is also being renovated to include additional space for recreation opportunities and public rental.
This project is expected to break ground in 2023.
If Clubhouse will be used for Rec.Opportunities, WHY is it not accounted for in either the Golf Course or LORAC Applications?
LU 21 0076, LU 21 0078 , And not accounted for in any Traffic counts or parking studies.
42•Register Online•WWW.LOPARKS.ORG FALL 2022
COMMENTS ABOUT PARKING DEMAND FROM THE CLUBHOUSE
Response: The parking study (Exhibit F- 004) considered parking demand generated by the clubhouse as
part of the assessment. The study uses the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition ( ITE Manual) as a
basis for determining parking demand. The ITE Manual describes golf course sites as having " clubhouses
with a pro shop, restaurant, lounge, and banquet facilities" as an accessory use accounted for in the parking
demand of golf course sites. Banquet facilities are defined as a building or portion of a building for rent by
the public which has a principal intended use of holding events. Once the LORAC is developed the
clubhouse will no longer serve as the site of golf check- in and will instead serve the primary purpose of
providing additional programming space for small recreational classes or meetings, with a possible
secondary purpose of providing rental space for small events of a similar nature to the banquet facility uses
described above. Because these uses are already accounted for in the ITE Manual description of a golf
course use, the parking demand for the clubhouse is met within the total demand for the golf course. No
offices or staff workspaces will be located in the clubhouse.
Clubhouse will not be a GOLF COURSE venue, so the ITE Manual description is a moot point. Doesn't
address new uses and what impacts might be as part of the Rec. Center complex LOC 50.07.003.iii(2)
The Engineering staff is incorrect in their analysis since clubhouse renovation, additional uses were not take
into account in traffic/parking studies. Clubhouse IS NOT related to any Golf Course uses.Does not take into
account, Additional Programming Space, Classrooms, Storage, Public Equipment Rental, special event,
meetings or anything else they have suggested. How were the impacts of the additional uses of a
"clubhouse" that is not a clubhouse included in the traffic and parking studies?
As for studies which one do we believe,
With one exception,all studied intersections will operate at an acceptable LOS through the 2022 year of
opening With Both Projects conditions(the Recreation Center and Rassekh Park)during the weekday AM and
PM peak hours and the SAT peak hour.The Stafford Road/Rosemont Road/Atherton Drive intersection
operates with a critical v/c ratio exceeding the County maximum of 0.90 in the 2020 weekday PM Peak hour
conditions,and the addition of background growth and project trips further degrades operations in future
year scenarios. Future intersection capacity mitigation,in the form of exclusive turn lanes on three of the
intersection approaches, has been considered by the County. Installing at least the northbound and
westbound turn lanes would resolve the near-term capacity deficiencies and would accommodate the impact
of the Recreation Center. . .
Lake Owego Parks and Recreation How do they figure that t,226 daily L-ORAC trips plus Golf Course and Rassekh
Rassekh Park Access Report trips to the regular growth will not have an impact•They just keep playing with the
August 13,2021 numbers and studies until they make it work to fit their projects..... B5!
Page 4 The Recreation Center is anticipated to generate 1,226 net new vehicle trips during a typical weekday,
including 76 during the AM peak hour and 94 during the PM peak hour,plus 29 during the SAT peak hour.
Table 2.2020 Level of Service Without Project
INTERSECTION A 1A Peak Hou• PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour
# (critical lane Operating Delay Delay Delay
group) Standard LOS ( eh) v/c LOS ( eh) v/c LOS (s/veh) v/c
Stafford
Rd/Rosemont LOS E C 23.9 0.86 F 62.4 1.20 A 7.5 0.45
Rd/Atherton Dr
(W8/NB/N8)
Table 2 shows that the roundabout is currently operating below City LOS standards during the PM peak hour with
the longest delays on the northbound approach.The roundabout currently operates within the City standards
during the AM and Saturday peak hours.
Table 3.Estimated 2022 Level of Service Without Project
INTERSECTION AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Ho it
# (critical Lane Operating Delay Delay Delay
group) Standard LOS (s/veh) v/c LOS (s/veh) v/c LOS (s/veh) v/c
Stafford
Rd/Rosemont
1
Rd/Atherton Dr LOSE D 26.2 0.89 F 69.7 1.23 A 7.7 0.46
(W8/NB/NB)
Table 3 shows that,in the 2022 Without Project conditions,the roundabout will operate below City LOS standards
during the PM peak hour with the longest delays on the northbound approach.The roundabout will operate
within the City standards during the AM and Saturday peak hours.
• Traffic Study[LOC 50.07.003.1.iii(2)1:The testimony questions the validity of the traffic
study and cumulative impacts with Rassekh Park, LORAC,and golf course projects.
Traffic was addressed in the Staff Report under Traffic Study standards[LOC
50.07.003.1.iii(2)] on pages 32-33.A traffic impact analysis was submitted by the
applicant that included the LORAC and Rassekh Park projects(Exhibit F-005).The
Engineering staff concurs with the applicant's traffic impact analysis and its findings.
Accordingly,staff finds that the analysis in the Staff Report correctly addressed the
criteria after considering the additional evidence and testimony received.
City answer to roundabout issues- Let the county fix it "down the road" (pun intended)!
Quote from confession of a recovering engineer, Confessions of a Recovering Engineer,by Charles L. Marohn,Jr.
Traffic engineers are a critical part of designing transportation systems, but the values of the public need to dominate decision-
making.Value decisions need to be stripped out of the design process and given over to nonprofessionals, preferably elected
officials and the people living within the community—those directly affected by the design. Elected officials must be given the
ability to set the values for the project. It is their responsibility,on behalf of the people they serve,to establish the automobile
design speed,the number of vehicles that should be accommodated,the size of vehicle that should be considered in the
design,and the degree of deference that should be shown to people walking or biking at a given intersection.These are not
design decisions;they are value decisions.
We must also insist that engineers use value-free descriptions for the work they are doing. If they are proposing to widen the
street, it should be called a "street widening"and not a "street improvement." If they are cutting down all of the trees adjacent
to the street, it should be called "tree removal"and not brought forth as an "enhancement."The goal for everyone is to
communicate as clearly,factually, and value-free as possible. Elected officials must insist on this.
The burden and responsibility of making value decisions should not rest with technical professionals.Traffic engineers are
incapable of representing the complexity of human experience that needs to be considered in a street design.That is especially
true when industry orthodoxy is adhered to.This is not so much a statement on the engineering profession as it is an
acknowledgment that city streets are the frameworks of human habitat, a complex-adaptive environment that must harmonize
many competing interests.
..., if we align the design approach with the values of the community,we can reduce death,create places of greater prosperity,
spend less money on transportation,and get a better functioning system.We can do all of this, but only if we address the
underlying values of the design process.To build a strong and prosperous community, local leaders must assert their
community's values and see them reflected in the transportation system.
So, take a look at Traffic totals,
Total daily traffic trips to the 3 new recreational facilities in Stafford.
LORAC- 1,226 Daily trips
Golf Course- 272
Rassekh- 71/405 sat.
How can that mean NEW daily trips not impact the area and at least
as some on the DRC state that it should at least calls for a conversation during
the hearing on "ACCUMULATIVE IMPACTS" ,
PNA Uses 1LOC 50.03.002.31
A major public facility,like LORAC and a 183-space parking lot,is a conditional use in the PNA
zone(LOC 50.03.003.S.c and LOC 50.10.003.2"Park Improvements,Major").
Use-Specific Standards for Major Public Facilities ROC 50.03.003.5.cl
Major public facilities are park improvements that will create additional motor or foot traffic
impacts on the surrounding neighborhood(LOC 50.10.003.2"Public Facilities,Major").
LORAC will create additional vehicle or foot traffic to the site.Per Subsection S.c,major
public facilities not covered under other use-specific standards must meet the following:
vii. Levels of operations shall be adjusted to avoid conflict with adjacent uses where
practical.
The applicant's narrative states LORAC operating schedule will be managed by the Lake
Oswego Parks and Recreation Department as needed to limit impacts on nearby properties
as practical(Exhibit F-001,page 22). LORAC activities will occur indoors,with some outdoor
amenities being used on an ad hoc basis.Overflow parking is being accommodated on the
Lakeridge High School site(Exhibit F-010 is the intergovernmental agreement with the
School District)and on Hazelia Field park across Stafford Rd.(a city-owned property).The
proposed major public facility's operations will minimize conflict with adjacent uses as
described in the application and discussed in this report.This criterion is met.
the minimum demand.This portion of the standard is met'.
Per Subsection 2.a.ii(3),there is also a maximum number of parking spaces that can be
provided.The maximum is either 125%of the number of spaces required under the
numerical method (LOC Table 50.06.002-3)or the required number of spaces determined by
the Parking Study Method [Subsection 2.a.ii(2)). For this project, using the Parking Study
Method determination,the parking demand is 110 spaces for LORAC and 77 spaces for the
golf course,for a total of 187 spaces. For purposes of this standard, 187 spaces is also the
maximum permitted per the Parking Study Method.The proposal includes 183 spaces,
which does not exceed 187 spaces.'This portion of the standard is met.
No mention of "New uses"at clubhouse l
Traffic Study(LOC 50.077.003.1.a.iiil
The purpose of a traffic study is tc ensure that the existing and proposed transportation
facilities in the vicinity of the proposed development are capable of safely and efficiently
accommodating the amount of traffic expected to be generated by the project.The traffic
study provides the opportunity to protect the future operations and safety of transportation
facilities and major transit corridors by implementing the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Conditions triggering the requirement of a traffic study are outlined in LOC
50.07.003.1.a.iii(2). NO mention of Clubhouse use as part of LU 22 0002
The applicant is proposing the construction of a new recreation and aquatic center(LORAC)
with a 9-hole golf course on a site previously used only for an 18-hole golf course.A Traffic
Impact Analysis(TIA)was submitted(Exhibit F-004)that evaluated the projected impacts
resulting from LORAC and renovation of the golf course.Taking into consideration the
pending approval to modify the golf course from 18 holes to nine holes(LU 21-0076),the
development proposal for both uses is anticipated to generate 104 additional trips during
the AM peak hour,131 trips during the PM peak hour,39 additional trips during the peak
hour on Saturdays,and an additional 1,477 average daily weekday trips(Exhibit F-004,pages
6-7).
According to the operational analysis conducted in the TIA,all study-area intersections are
currently operating within the applicable performance standards for their respective
jurisdictions and will continue to do so following the completion and occupancy of LORAC
and 9-hole golf course. (Note: the DRC Findings for LU 21-0076 will be added to the record
once adopted as scheduled on August 15, 2022).The projected impacts were reported to be
minor at all off-site intersections,including the intersection of Stafford Rd.at the Rosemont
Rd./Atherton Dr. roundabout. Queues anticipated to occur at each off-site intersection
during the peak hours are expected to fit within the available storage provided on the
roadways.
Clackamas County,which is the responsible jurisdiction of Stafford Rd.at the Rosemont
Rd./Atherton Dr. roundabout, provided comments regarding the TIA(Exhibit F-011).The
County concurred with the use of traffic counts without adjustments in the analysis and
concurred with the findings that no mitigation measures be required from the applicant for
improvements at the roundabout. PM currently at LO5 F
Once again sorry for the length, no staff or design team to assist in testimony. :)
Please deny application until all errors and issues are corrected.
This will have enormous lasting consequences for the area.
Rick Cook