MO 1996-006 to 1996-010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

510—GSG-3825 C. C. S. PLANNING 772 P03 FEB 27' 96 1G : 12 Attachment 1 Page 2 of 3 Mr. Gary Kruger PAGE 2 Traffic Forecasts We agree that your analysis uses conservatively high traffic forecasts for the project. Specifically, your report assumed a rate Of 0.98 inbound and 0.98 outbound trips per total room, which is higher than any other trip generation studies reported. For example, an "all suites" hotel with a small amount of meeting space shows a PM peak hour rate of 0.32 inbound and 0.55 outbound trips per occupied room (ITE Trip Generation Report, Sth Edition); another hotel of similar size and containing convention facilities showed a rate of 0.57 inbound and 0.45 outbound trips per occupied room (San Diego Traffic Generators, 1990). Your analysis also conservatively assumes that all trips would use Marina Drive. There is a higher degree of uncertainty about other "cumulative" traffic growth that could occur at the Doolittle/Marina intersection, however. It is our understanding that all of the "cumulative" projects included in the original Marriott Inn environmental document except Roberts Landing have been completed. The Roberts Landing traffic volumes included in your cumulative analysis appear to be slightly different than those shown in the Roberts Landing traffic study, but differences are not significant. No allowance was made in your calculations (or in the original environmental document) for other "regional" traffic growth that could occur from, say, expansion at Oakland Airport and diversion from I-880 freeway. You indicated that Alameda CMA has projected a 35 percent increase in north - south traffic (all major routes including I-880) by 2010. Assuming the 35 percent traffic increase for Doolittle through traffic at the intersection would provide a more conservative analysis for cumulative conditions. Traffic L We have reviewed your traffic level of service calculations and agree with your findings that, based on the existing and projected traffic volumes discussed above, Level of Service C would be maintained and therefore physical improvements would not be needed at the Doolittle/Marina intersection. The VIC ratios stated in your report do not appear to reflect lost time associated with signal phases and therefore may be understated. We believe the existing VIC ratio should be stated as 0.74 rather than 0.61 and that the existing plus project VIC ratio should be stated as 0.81 rather than 0.67. This does not affect the level of service (which is based on average delay) but reduces the amount of furhter traffic growth that could be accommodated before the intersection reaches capacity. For cumulative conditions (with the project) we recalculated the level of service and VIC ratio using a more conservative assumption of regional traffic growth on Doolittle (35 percent increase in through volumes in each direction). Our results indicate that Level of Service C would result from that level of traffic growth (VIC ratio of 0.85). It should be noted that such traffic growth is not associated with the Marriott project but rather traffic diverting from 1-880 freeway or traffic to and from the Oakland Airport or other regional generators. Q; WPDOCS"ARWOTT.UT 4