Additional MHS non-compliance with 2005-105 Condition of Approval 18 MHS Transportation Management Plan requirements

From: Charlessands Date: December 16, 2010 3:29:22 PM PST
To: Tlai@co.marin.ca.us
Cc: BCrawford@co.marin.ca.us, jtejirian@co.marin.ca.us, sadams@co.marin.ca.us, jarnold@co.marin.ca.us, hbrown@co.marin.ca.us, skinsey@co.marin.ca.us, cmcglashan@co.marin.ca.us, pfaulkner@co.marin.ca.us
Subject: Additional MHS non-compliance with 2005-105 Condition of Approval 18 MHS Transportation Management Plan requirements

Bcc: Madrone Park Circle, HVCC, SaveEvergreen, Hearus and HV Beat.

Hi Tom,

Per our discussion below are additional MHS non-compliance with 2005-105 Condition of Approval 18 MHS Transportation Management Plan requirements for your use.

A.     MHS  average car pool size may not include MHS' Shuttle

Marin Horizon School's (MHS) March 2010 Traffic Management Plan Rev. 1 (TMP) incorrectly states that the average car pool size includes students using the MHS Shuttle. See TMP pg. 4 Strategy I-A-1 – Car Pool Program.

MHS' Environmental Initial Study (MHS-EIS) does not state "that the average car pool size includes students using the MHS Shuttle". See MHS'-EIS carpooling pg. 22 and Appendix B Car pooling & Walling to School pg. 68. Indeed MHS' Environmental Initial Study (MHS-EIS) does not mention a MHS Shuttle at all.

We do not object to an appropriately sized MHS shuttle, as it takes 1 MHS vehicle per 1.53/2.3 student seats, depending on the age of the students, on a shuttle off of MHS' neighborhood streets. However a municipal +/- 60 seat bus is not an appropriately sized/scaled vehicle to be used on MHS' semi-rural, narrow street as it;

·        Is too long to make legal turning movements without crossing into and through oncoming traffic lanes;

·        Is too wide for MHS' Melrose Ave. passenger loading zone;

·        Is parked, washed and cleaned ,while parked in violation of the TMP, in front of the school and;

·        Has a significant negative impact on the character of MHS' neighborhood streets.

We request that the Community Development Agency ask MHS to use appropriately sized/scaled school buses such as a Michaels Transport Special Ed 12 -21 seat school bus that is ADA accessible or require MHS to stop using this inappropriately sized/scaled vehicle altogether and require all students to use passenger vehicles in compliance with MHS-EIS carpooling pg. 22 and Appendix B Car pooling & Walling to School pg. 68.

If MHS decides to use a special ed. 12 -20 seat bus this may reduce the total "
in and out" student vehicles trips by approximately 6 vehicles per trip. (Assuming 15 students per bus / 2.33 students = 6.52 say 7 students less one bus.)

The total maximum in-out MHS vehicles of 207 must then be accordingly readjusted downward by a total of 12 in-out trips per MHS Shuttle.

Use of  MHS' Shuttles is encouraged as they will have a positive impact on MHS' neighborhood character, quality by reducing traffic congestion on MHS" neighborhood streets by significantly reducing the percentage of total vehicles at peak hour MHS' opening and closing times  that are MHS vehicles. And have a significant "traffic calming" effect on Evergreen Ave.

I believe neighborhood residents will support an amendment to 2005-105 permitting MHS' use of Special Ed 12 -21 seat school buses and a corresponding reduction in the total maximum in/out vehicle trips as proposed above.

B.     MHS  vehicles entering on Evergreen are not compliant with MHS' TMP

In September 2010 an independent traffic survey showed that:

·        Morning peak hour MHS vehicles arriving/leaving on Evergreen accounted for 33% and 36% of the total of all east/west bound vehicles on Evergreen.

·        Afternoon peak hour MHS vehicles arriving/leaving on Evergreen accounted for 26% and 516% of the total of all east/west bound vehicles on Evergreen.

See. Fig. 1, 2 , 3 & 4.

It is significant to note that this traffic survey, over a nine day period, counted 190 MHS morning west bound arrivals on Evergreen and 89 west bound arrival on Evergreen  for a total of 279 MHS vehicles.

These 279 MHS vehicles are in violation of 2005-104 MHS'-EIS Traffic Management Plan Appendix B pg. 69. "Cars entering the neighborhood must use Montford Avenue".

These non-compliant MHS vehicles were not counted in any of Dowling & Associates traffic monitoring exams as the above cited requirement was perhaps inadvertently not included in MHS revised Traffic Management Plan. See 2005-105 Condition of Approval 18. The requirement that cars entering the neighborhood must use Montford Avenue was  not modified by DPW or any of Condition of Approval 18's stipulations.

Please keep me informed of the action you take to ensure compliance with 2006-105 requirements.