Response to Comments - Presidio Trust

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 7. Existing + Project Conditions – PM Peak HourONE-WAY COUPLET AT 14 TH & 15 TH AVE. GATESVARIANT: NEW PARK PRESIDIO BLVD. ACCESS WITH INBOUND ONLYTRAFFIC AT 14 TH AND 15 TH AVE. GATESTRAFFICEXISTINGCONDITIONS ALT. 1 ALT. 2 ALT. 3 ALT. 4 ALT. 1 ALT. 2 ALT. 3 ALT. 4CONTROLINTERSECTION DEVICE DELAY a LOS DELAY a LOS DELAY a LOS DELAY a LOS DELAY a LOS DELAY a LOS DELAY a LOS DELAY a LOS DELAY a LOSLake Street/15 th AvenueLake Street/14 th Avenue bLake Street/Park PresidioBoulevardCalifornia Street/15 th Avenue bCalifornia Street/14 th Avenue bCalifornia Street/Park PresidioBoulevardLake Street/17 th Avenue bLake Street/Funston Avenue b4-WayStop2-WayStopTrafficSignal2-WayStop2-WayStopTrafficSignal2-WayStop2-WayStop13.1 B 18.1 C 13.7 B 13.5 B 13.2 B 14.0 B 12.8 B 12.7 B 12.6 B30.5 D >50 F >50 F >50 F 46.2 E 46.2 E 36.4 E 36.1 E 35.2 E18.4 B 22.0 C 19.2 B 19.2 B 18.9 B 19.0 B 17.9 B 17.8 B 18.0 B20.2 C 20.7 C 19.2 C 19.4 C 19.4 C 24.2 C 22.1 C 22.2 C 21.8 C38.9 E >50 F >50 F >50 F >50 F >50 F 41.4 E 41.4 E 40.1 E22.2 C 22.3 C 22.3 C 22.3 C 22.3 C 22.8 C 20.9 C 20.7 C 20.6 C16.7 C 17.9 C 17.1 C 17.1 C 17.0 C 17.7 C 16.9 C 16.9 C 16.8 C15.9 C 17.7 C 16.6 C 16.6 C 16.5 C 18.8 C 18.3 C 18.3 C 18.2 CNew Alternative Access/ParkPresidio Boulevard14.9 B 6.2 A 5.6 A 5.8 ASource: Wilbur Smith Associates 2006d.Notes:aDelay presented in seconds per vehicle based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology.bLOS and delay are shown for the worst minor stop-controlled approach. Major approach is uncontrolled and without delay.LOS = level of service56 Responses toComments Public Health Service Hospital
TR-31. Estimated Traffic Generated by Former HospitalRPN suggested that applying current trip generation rates to the former hospital use results in tripgeneration estimates for the hospital that are unreliable. RPN stated that anecdotal evidence from longtermresidents of the neighborhood calls the hypothetical analysis into question, and speculates that thenursing staff of the hospital would have relied heavily on public transportation in the 1950s to 1970s.RPN went on to say that “an SEIS should not include such unreliable data as it calls into question theintegrity of the report.” Several individuals agreed, suggesting that the traffic estimated to be possiblygenerated by the hospital when it was operational did not reflect actual conditions during that time. Onecommenter noted that from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, children were able to play in the streetwithout concerns of car traffic, which would not be possible with the vehicle trip generation estimated inthe Draft SEIS. Commenters also noted that when the hospital was operational, other conditions affectingthe traffic through the gates were different: 1) cut-through traffic through the PHSH district was muchmore restricted, 2) more people used transit to travel to and from the project site, and 3) automobileownership and use were lower than today. The CCSF also suggested that the estimate of traffic thatcould have been generated by the hospital at the project site several years ago is misleading, irrelevant,and likely inaccurate. However, one individual disagreed with the notion, and noted that there were manypeople in the PHSH complex in the World War II era, and that heavy activity in the PHSH district wasnormal in the past.Response TR-31 – In 1970, the PHSH had an average monthly inpatient load of 425 and the annualoutpatient visits totaled 122,700, for an average daily outpatient load of about 336 patients. The PHSHemployed nearly 1,000 people, including 100 physicians (Thompson 1997). Although translating thislevel of occupancy and activity level to trips to and from the project site is somewhat speculative, thepatient and staff levels described above suggest that the PHSH district was a bustling area. The estimatesof traffic that would be generated by this level of occupancy is provided only for the purpose ofestablishing historical context regarding general activity level in the district.TR-32. Traffic Generated by Recent PHSH District UsesThe CCSF requested a better description of recent occupancy (e.g., Chinese-American School and JCC)of the project site and the correlation between those activities and the cited 15 th Avenue Gate traffic countdata.Response TR-32 – Tables 8 and 9 below describe the recent occupancy of the project site and trafficcounts at the 15 th Avenue Gate that correlate to occupancy of the site by these tenants. Much of the trafficcount data were gathered when the project site was vacant for the purposes of establishing existingconditions prior to planning studies for the Presidio overall and for the project site. Some traffic datawere collected when the JCC was at the site. The more recent counts include Arion Press, Lone MountainChildren’s Center, and a small amount of office use occupying the upper floor of Building 1806.Public Health Service Hospital Response to Comments 57
Page 7 and 8:
Sharon KatoAnsel D. KinneyRich Koch
Page 9 and 10: Table 2. Organization of Responses
Page 11 and 12: 1 Responses to Comments1.1 GENERAL
Page 13 and 14: during the initiation of scoping fo
Page 15 and 16: within the level of activity analyz
Page 17 and 18: million more than Alternative 4. Co
Page 19 and 20: AL-5. Incorporation of Park Presidi
Page 21 and 22: Table 3. Traffic Signal Warrants An
Page 23 and 24: leads me to conclude that the Trust
Page 25 and 26: ehabilitated or redeveloped; most o
Page 27 and 28: approaches would fall within the ra
Page 29 and 30: of the alternatives would remove bu
Page 31 and 32: “unenlightening.” They noted th
Page 33 and 34: The project provides for adequate b
Page 35 and 36: used, in conjunction with other dis
Page 37 and 38: the Park Presidio Boulevard Access
Page 39 and 40: The traffic volumes associated with
Page 41 and 42: associated with the Lone Mountain C
Page 43 and 44: Table 4. Trip Generation DataWEEKDA
Page 45 and 46: to another location in the neighbor
Page 47 and 48: Response TR-12 - In response to the
Page 49 and 50: Boulevard and the proportion coming
Page 51 and 52: agrees with commenters that measure
Page 53 and 54: TR-21. Impact of Additional Traffic
Page 55 and 56: TR-25. Transportation Demand Manage
Page 57 and 58: Response TR-28 - The Trust will con
Page 59: Table 6. Existing + Project Conditi
Page 63 and 64: Table 9. Traffic Count Data at 15 t
Page 65 and 66: • Clarification of footnotes;•
Page 67 and 68: uilding (See SEIS Section 3.7.2). T
Page 69 and 70: one-hour and eight-hour average CO
Page 71 and 72: demand on weekends under Alternativ
Page 73 and 74: any increase in storm water flow fr
Page 75 and 76: Habitat), proposed human use associ
Page 77 and 78: any potential effects to water qual
Page 79 and 80: The Trust will determine whether th
Page 81 and 82: 2 Public Agency CommentsUnited Stat
Page 83 and 84: 80 Public Agency Comments Public He
Page 99 and 100: 2.5 GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE, HIGHWAY AND
Page 101 and 102: 2.6 CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISC
Page 103 and 104: Public Health Service Hospital Resp
Page 111 and 112:
Public Health Service Hospital Resp
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Chiuchiarelli, Nicky: (AL-2), 11; (
Page 119 and 120:
Knox, Aliza: (AL-4), 13; (AL-5), 15
Page 121 and 122:
Santamaria, David, Founder and Advi
show all

Response to Comments - Presidio Trust

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?