3.0 Responses to Comments
adjusted to respond to ridership demands (e.g. increasing transit service to meet high ridership demand, or reducing transit service if ridership demand is low). While Metro anticipates operating the light rail lines (e.g. the Gold Line route) in the system with 5 minute headways in the future (which would increase rail transit capacity in the study area), future headways for the bus lines that serve the study area are not known. Because headways for bus lines are not yet known, and the number of buses per hour (as determined by headways) is the primary variable for determining overall transit capacity (because the capacity of bus vehicles are fixed), it is not possible to conduct the analysis as described in the comment. 27a-13 The comment states the Original DEIR should address ways in which the project will improve the circulation and accessibility of local fixed buses during oversaturated peak hour intersection conditions. The Project Alternative establishes new street and urban design standards that will enhance the accessibility of residents, employees and visitors alike to local buses. And while local bus service may expect some delays, along with the additional traffic, Metro may also, in response to growing bus ridership, increase the number of lines or bus service that frequent the area. In order to most effectively improve on-time bus performance the City, as part of the Mobility Element, will include a transit priority network that will provide full or part-time dedicated bus lanes and/or other transit enhancements (signal pre-emption, loading zones) to reduce travel delays. 27a-14 The comment states, “In reviewing the Transportation Element and accompanying traffic data provided in Appendix 4 of the DEIR, we were unable to assess or determine the validity of the conclusions set forth in this section due to the DEIR's lack of available supporting data for its assertions. In particular, the data tables in this section reference a 2010 study not included in the DEIR or within any other available resource. It is therefore our recommendation that the DEIR provide the appropriate supporting evidence, within the appendix if needed, with regard to the VMT analysis of the CASP. Technical data and/or reports should describe and tabulate: 1.) “How in/out project‐related trips were estimated, including geographic and network factors, socioeconomic modeling parameters, modal splits and trip generation estimates and assumptions employed in the transportation demand model (TDM); and 2.) “Include a detailed summary of results and speed‐VMT distributions for Los Angeles County, including those results reported in Tables 4‐8 and 4‐9 of the Original DEIR.” The traffic study, which provided the underlying transportation analysis incorporated into the Original DEIR, is provided as Appendix 4A. The TDF model developed for the Proposed Alternative was used to estimate project related trips. As detailed in Response 27a-2, the TDF model is based on the SCAG model, with further detail provided in the subarea around CASP. The SCAG model development report, which provides detailed discussion of the model structure and parameters, is provided in Appendix A4. To model the effects of the Specific Plan, the socioeconomic data (jobs, housing, population, etc.) forecast for the Project Area under the Preferred Alternative were input into the Project 3-96
Cornfield Arroyo Seco Specific Plan FEIR