And here is more... Part 2 Fwd: Update from FOTL - Part 2 - Traffic & Redmond Ridge East

Here is Part 2 of a two part posting

From: Joseph Elfelt
To: Joseph Elfelt
Cc: Steve Shifton
Subject: Update from FOTL - Part 2 - Traffic & Redmond Ridge East
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:01:51 -0500

Part 2 of 2 parts
Update on Redmond Ridge East and traffic mess on Novelty Hill Road & Union Hill Road
March 11, 2005
By: Joseph Elfelt, for Friends of the Law (FOTL)

Here are more details on exactly how the county cooked the books three different ways in order to falsely claim that the proposed Redmond Ridge East development of 800 homes passed the traffic concurrency test.

The site of the proposed RRE development fails the traffic concurrency requirements if two things are true:

1. The concurrency model forecasts the volume on any section of Novelty Hill Road will be equal to or greater than 110% of the capacity of the road. In other words, volume/capacity (v/c) => 1.1 (Note - the volumes in the model assume full buildout of Redmond Ridge and Trilogy.) The 2005 model shows that this criteria is already met since the volume on Novelty Hill Road between Redmond Ridge Drive and Trilogy Parkway is forecast to be 111.7% of capacity. (Eastbound in p.m. peak hour)

2. More than 30% of the traffic heading to the zone containing RRE travels on the section of NHR where v/c => 1.1 For modeling purposes the unincorporated area is divided into 1,300 zones. RRE (and maybe a bit of Redmond Ridge) is in zone 372. If the road-across-the-wetland is deleted and the 2005 model re-run then the model will easily forecast that more than 30% of the zone 372 (RRE) traffic will use the section of Novelty Hill Road east of Redmond Ridge Drive since that is the main way to get to zone 372.

In short, deleting the unfunded road-across-the-wetland and re-running the 2005 model will show the RRE fails the traffic concurrency requirements and therefore these additional 800 homes cannot be approved. Let’s call this unfunded road-across-the-wetland scam #1.

Here is scam #2.

The 2005 concurrency model forecasts that 57.32% of the p.m. peak hour trips inbound to RRE will originate inside Redmond Ridge and Trilogy. By contrast the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) issued for RRE forecasts that only 18.12% of the p.m. peak hour trips inbound to RRE will originate inside Redmond Ridge and Trilogy. The county says that the most accurate information for a proposed development will be found in its EIS since that document has the most detailed analysis.

If the 2005 model is corrected to be consistent with the EIS then the model will show a significantly higher % of RRE trips coming north on Avondale and turning onto Novelty Hill Road. This increased flow on Novelty will cause zone 372 (RRE) to fail concurrency since both criteria will be met. First, the 2005 model already forecasts that when Redmond Ridge and Trilogy are builtout the first three sections of Novelty just east of Avondale have v/c ratios of 1.22138, 1.2239, and 1.2239. Second, the 2005 model already says these sections of Novelty just east of Avondale will carry 23% of the traffic inbound to RRE. Increasing this flow to be consistent with the EIS will easily push this amount over the 30% threshold.

Here is scam #3.

In response to the hearing examiner’s request, the county on March 4th (day after concurrency review closed) submitted an exhibit purporting to show the actual 1998 traffic counts the county had used to calibrate both the 2002a model and the 2005 model. That document claims that in 1998 in the p.m. peak hour there were 748 vehicles per hour (vph) approaching 208th and 762 vph heading east on Novelty away from 208th. The county used those alleged counts to reduce the forecast volume on Novelty Hill Road in their traffic models thus creating the illusion there was idle capacity for RRE.

David and I received our copies of this exhibit in the mail on March 7th.

I immediately knew some of the key data in this exhibit was completely bogus. Several years ago I obtained copies of the counties actual counts along Novelty Hill Road. My notes indicate the county made the following actual counts of traffic eastbound in the p.m. peak hour just east of 208th:
1994 730 vph
1995 788 vph
1996 846 vph
1997 903 vph (county claims 762 vph in 1998)

On March 8th I e-mailed the county traffic staff in charge of counting and asked for a copy of any counts the county made along Novelty Hill Road in 1998. I received a reply the same day showing in 1998 in the p.m. peak hour there were 965 vph approaching 208th and 975 vph heading east on Novelty away from 208th. Obviously these real counts are much higher than the bogus 748 vph and 762 vph figures the county provided to the examiner.

Note - the concurrency model is operated by a small group of staff with zero peer review by other qualified county employees outside of this small group. The fact that actions of the concurrency group are highly suspect should not be interpreted to reflect poorly on staff members outside of the concurrency group.

Remember to get on FOTL's e-mail list for future updates and to make a tax deductible contribution to FOTL.