AgdaPkt 2017-09-11 Closed and Joint SA PFA

Browse Search

7.A. - Page 213 p. 2 a. Hexagon response: "The commenter draws broad conclusions about existing intersection levels of service based on anecdotal evidence from observations without presenting any supporting data or field measurements of delay to support their conclusion." b. PRISM Engineering response:Our conclusion was not anecdotal. We collected real data, took a full traffic count,and videotaped traffic. We analyzed the data with industry standard Synchro v.9 traffic engineering software. We measured the level of service using HCM methods. However,the calculated results did not comport with visual observations of traffic operations I made in the field. I also filmed the traffic for an hour and have proof of the numerous intersection blockages taking place during the peak hour(showing the NB approach blocked),and drivers at LOS F conditions,obviously,and not at the LOS D calculated.This condition is entirely because of the very real LOS F operations at the freeway ramp intersections spilling over to this intersection causing LOS F. This LOS problem was not addressed in the Hexagon comments. 2. PRISM Engineering original statement: "CALTRANS GUIDE FOR THE PREPARATION OF TRAFFIC 1MPACTSTUDIES. ...states: "When a State highway has saturated flows,the use of a micro- simulation model is encouraged for the analysis." I can definitively state that,based on my actual observations of traffic operations of this intersection and adjacent intersections in the field during the am peak hour,that LOS F conditions are significantly present for northbound traffic. 424 of the traffic(the northbound approach)are delayed significantly,and waiting more than one signal cycle to get through. This is an LOS F condition" a. Hexagon response: "The City of Redwood City,which is the lead agency for this project pursuant to CEOA, has adopted the HCM methodology for the analysis of traffic impacts. ...however,the spillback is only momentary,and all vehicles clear this intersection during each signal cycle" b. PRISM Engineering response:The Hexagon response ignored the Caltrans traffic study guidelines,which apply here,and which encourage the use of microsimulation method, not HCM,when there are saturated flows between intersections. This situation applies here, where there are not only saturated flows on Woodside going north,but stop and go conditions (worse). Hexagon also stated that the north bound Woodside traffic always clears every signal cycle.This is not true based on our peak hour observations for the entire hour, and we have video proof of these blockages taking place when the NB signal turns red, where drivers are frequently waiting more than one signal cycle to get through.This is by definition is an LOS F condition(a delay greater than 85 seconds is LOS F, and this is a more than 120 second delay) 3. PRISM Engineering original statement: "An average elementary school is getting queue lines up to a quarter mile long (1320 feet).The distance between the project driveway and Spring Street is less than 600 feet. This means that when parents are arriving with their children (ages 5-11 yrs old), the vehicles will block all driveways long Charter Street for in and outbound trafficfor all businesses, and far beyond Spring Street." c. Hexagon response: "It is estimated that approximately 40 percent of the students at the proposed new Rocketship school in Redwood City would live within walking distance (0.75 miles)of the project site" �� M P.111SRIM� www.prism.engineering