Arcadia Wins! Blog

Believe It; Traffic WILL Improve!

This entry was posted on 11/15/2006 5:38 PM and is filed under uncategorized.

With respect to Dr. Stewart Bell’s letter printed in the Pasadena Star-News on Nov. 13, I would like to clarify several points that Dr Bell raises regarding the proposed Caruso development at Santa Anita racetrack.

Yes, Dr Bell rightly points out that Arcadia traffic is getting worse and this will continue as the city has no intentions (or any money) to replace the outdated traffic signaling systems currently in use. He is correct in saying that traffic will increase due to the project but it is not so much the finite number of cars which is important but whether the traffic system street by street will be able to cope. He is also correct when he says that the developer has made claims that the traffic situation will improve after he has replaced the outmoded signaling, with state of the art computerized traffic signaling systems which monitors actual flow patterns of traffic.

However this is not so outlandish as he thinks (re: "This defies common sense") and it is also borne out by the most recent DEIR (Draft Environmental Impact Report) currently available for public perusal on the city’s website. (This report is compiled by independent experts who specialize in this work for all developments).This report clearly supports this claim having studied the effect on 42 traffic intersections within and without Arcadia. In fact the report states that of these 42 intersections, only 20 will be impacted by the Caruso project. It also states that with all the improvements and mitigations Caruso is prepared to undertake, 16 of these 20 intersections will show BETTER traffic flows in 2009 than if nothing was built at all. (The experts also factored into their calculations 47 other developments in neighboring cities within that timescale). In fact Caruso may be the only developer who may be willing to undertake such costly traffic improvements, thereby giving yet another free benefit to the city.

I encourage all Arcadians to exercise their right to express their opinions on the proposed Caruso project but from a basis of accurate and factual information, not hearsay or marketing hype. This Arcadia Wins! website provides such information and a concise summary of salient points from the DEIR for Arcadians and monitors the debate objectively as we, as Arcadian residents, are not funded by, or a “yes man” to either Westfield or Caruso.

Nicky Hunter

founding member, Arcadia Wins!

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URL for this entry

No trackbacks exist for this entry.

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

12/2/2006 2:22 AM Arcadia Resident wrote:
Of course, Caruso’s traffic report says he will make it better. There is not a traffic consultant alive who works for developers who doesn’t produce reports that would say anything else. The real issue is in the assumptions that he made in order to produce a fictional report and how likely you are to believe those assumptions.

For example, how did he distribute the traffic in his analysis? Did he assume that everyone would take the most direct route, or did he assume they would use side streets because there was more capacity on those side streets to accommodate his traffic? That little trick alone will make a big difference in which intersections are impacted and how severely. And, it may not reflect at all the actual traffic pattern that people will use when the project is built. Then we’ll all be sitting in gridlock in 5 years wondering “what went wrong?”

Another frequently used trick to minimize traffic, on paper, is to take credit for “shared” trips and “pass-by” trips. That allows the analysis to ignore people who might be passing by anyway and just stop in, or to claim that some percentage of visitors would be making only one trip for multiple purposes. It means those numbers aren’t counted in the total, even thought they will be on the street anyway. The result is real traffic impacts, which will never be mitigated. Caruso took excessive credit for those in his first traffic analysis and in effect was able to ignore half the trips to his project. That made the traffic look really good on paper. But, it was also such an embarrassing omission that the City forced him to redo the report.

It would appear that the traffic analysis also overlooked the obvious. If this project is supposed to bring more people to the race track and it’s new 100,000 square foot “simulcast center” as everyone claims, shouldn’t those trips be counted as well? And, what happens if the track gets the 2000 slot machines that the owners and unions are lobbying for in Sacramento. Shouldn’t those 1000’s of additional trips be counted since the new building will already be in place?

I wouldn’t be so quick to embrace the Caruso traffic analysis. Suggesting that a high-tech, computerized system will solve everything has been done before and it assumes that we Arcadians are OK having Hollywood/Grove Mall levels of traffic and pollution. A great deal of the Los Angeles region already has the system that Caruso is promoting, and I don’t hear them raving about their congestion-free Boulevards.

No matter how you cut it, it’s still 30,000 more vehicles on weekdays, and 50,000 more on the weekends. It will take a lot of special effects to make that disappear.
Reply to this
1. 12/3/2006 10:48 PM Scott Hettrick wrote:
  First of all, I will make an exception to the rule of this site that people who write or respond to blogs must provide an e-mail for verification purposes only (it will not be published) and a zip code so we know generally what part of the city of Arcadia you live in, or if you are not a resident. The exception is to address issues for which others may share your concerns.
  
  Second, we appreicate all comments but I hardly know where to begin with this one.
  
  Let's start with the factual errors:
  
  * It is not 30,000 more vehicles -- it is 15,000 more vehicles presumably making two trips each, but spread throughout the day as opposed to the race track patrons who all come and go at the same time, causing major congestion.
  
  * The developer Caruso Affiliated had nothing to do with the creation of this EIR or the hiring of the consultant who produced it. That is the total responsibility of the city, specifically so the report will be unbiased.
  
  * The city did not ask Caruso to redo the EIR because of any erroneous reporting in the first EIR relative to traffic. In fact, the revised EIR was not required at all. Caruso voluntarily asked the city to prepare a revised EIR (at a cost of more than $1 million out of Caruso's pocket) to avoid a potential lawsuit from Westfield in the event the city approved the original EIR which included mention of residential dwellings that are no longer part of the project. That is the only major difference in the previous and revised EIR.
  
  * As I understand it, the simulcast center is nothing more than a consolidation of all the satellite wagering already being conducted at the track into a single area of the grandstands, which will make it much less distracting and much more pleasant for parents with children to walk around inside other parts of the building.
  
  As for your other comments, I don't know if you are a traffic expert; I certainly am not. All I know is what I read that is written by experts in traffic study and approved by the city, and the evidence I see of Caruso's other work, such as The Grove, which created much-improved traffic in that area since it opened. I should know, as I worked just a few blocks away for several years and often took business lunches there and the adjoining Farmer's Market. And my daughter lives just a few blocks from The Grove, which she loves to frequent.
  
  I would suggest you raise your concerns about the findings of the report with the city. They may provide valid answers before you just assume everything in the report is a manipulation and deception.
  
  The traffic is getting far worse in Arcadia every day even without any new development and no one is doing anything about it. There's no money unless it comes from our wallets.
  
  Unless you or anyone else can offer a viable alternative to increasing traffic, this seems like our best chance to improve traffic in Arcadia, and at no cost to any of us taxpayers!
  
  Scott Hettrick
  founder, Arcadia Wins!
  Reply to this