pages: TransportationCommission/2007-05-23.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2007-05-23 | 8 | minute wait, more than double the existing wait time, at an intersection was definitely a significant impact even though the starting point is LOS F; he believed that kind of analysis did not make sense. Chair Knox White noted that he was very pleased with the staff comments. Commissioner Schatmeier noted that he found it difficult to believe that the intersection of South Loop Road and Harbor Bay Parkway could be LOS F. He had spoken at the City Council meeting about the peak hour traffic congestion as a result of Amelia Earhart School, which impacted intersections 9, 10, 11 and 12. He noted that those intersections were close to gridlock during peak hours, sometimes taking 15 minutes to clear. Commissioner Ratto noted that he questioned the validity of all the tables, and did not know where all the numbers came from. He referred to the baseline chart, which stated that intersection #10 (Island Drive/Maitland Drive) would not be affected by the project. He found that very difficult to believe, and inquired how the drivers would get to the main island. Staff Khan noted that Table 3.12-5 defined the trip distribution, and that staff would ask the applicants to include a map or sketch showing trip distribution by location instead of just a list. Commissioner Ratto remarked that he was very concerned about the data, as well as the bicycle issue and not having any access to Island Drive. He cited the paragraph under TR-4 (3-12.17), which read, "The proposed project would not have a significant adverse effect on pedestrian, bicycle or transit facilities. However, due to the sensitive nature of this proposal, this connection has not been included in this analysis and would not be required as mitigation." He was very concerned about that language, and did not believe it was meaningful; he requested staff to address that issue as a primary concern. Commissioner Krueger noted the section on transit, bicycle and pedestrian impacts read, "A project would result in a significant transit, bicycle and/or pedestrian impact if its implementation would conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs." It continued to say in TR-4 that they would knowingly conflict with the Bicycle Master Plan. He believed they were producing a significant impact by blatantly conflicting with an existing policy, and stressed that it was not consistent. Chair Knox White noted that he was surprised that there was only a 30.9 second wait in the morning peak. In response to his inquiry regarding the peak hours, Commissioner McFarland stated that the data were collected in June 2006, which was after the school year had concluded. Chair Knox White believed that was a significant methodological flaw, and added that data from the school year should be included. He suggested that 9 through 12 were not correct. Commissioner Ratto believed the methodology should be examined, and believed that an average of school times and nonschool times would be misleading. Commissioner Subramaniam noted that 3.12-5 stated "when school was in session." Transportation Commission May 23, 2007 Page 8 of 12 | TransportationCommission/2007-05-23.pdf |