HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO200800068 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2008-10-07To: Joel Denunzio
From: Rebecca Abecassis
Date: September 26, 2008
Subject: Comments Rt. 29 and Hydraulic Rd.
Please find below our comments concerning the above referenced plans.
Of particular concern is the median break and temporary traffic signal at station 118. We
believe that this signal will be detrimental to the overall performance of the corridor and
will pose a safety risk for motorists.
Sheet 26
1. Both "C" and "E" in Pavement and Marking Legend should be 2' long 4' space,
and one of them should be deleted from the legend.
2. Label "A" near the side road across from Zan Rd, should a solid line that is
required to be at least 100' be shown at the minimum length?
3. At the stop condition for the dual right turn on SB 29, the right lane would be
unusable with a vehicle in the left lane due to sight distance issues. Another
solution for controlling the SB 29 dual right turns would be signalization of the
turn lanes. This option should be considered.
4. All four inch lines should be Type B Class III.
5. Has Auto -Turn been run for the SB 29 dual right turn? Trucks making the turn
may require more than a 13' lane.
6. All existing and proposed signing should be shown on this plan set and properly
labeled.
7. At station 99 is the label "A" correct?
8. At station 101, the entrance should have a full width right turn decal lane and a
proper taper.
9. At stations 101, 107, and 110 the crosswalks should be two parallel 6" lines.
10. At station 97, why does this entrance not have a painted crosswalk?
11. Delete N from the Pavement and Marking Legend. We do not use yellow
elongated arrows.
Sheet 27
12. Label "B" top right turn lane should be "E."
13. Wheelchair ramp near station 110 +50 is not shown.
14. The temporary signal is not appropriate at this location. There are significant
safety issues with the entrance /exit into the post office within a signalized
intersection. Because we do not concur with the median break at station 118,
comments were not provided on these markings.
15. At stations 105 and 110, the entrances should have full width right turn decel
lanes and a proper tapers.
16. At stations 105 and 107, the crosswalk should be two parallel 6" lines.
Sheet 28
17. New signal pole at Greenbrier Drive is not indicated correctly. A signal
modification plan will be needed.
18. No labels are shown indicating eradication of existing markings.
19. At station 120, what are the labels pointing to?
20. At station 127 +50 and at 128 why are crosswalks not used?
21. Crosswalk and wheelchair ramps should be added at southbound Greenbrier.
Sheet 29
22. There are no labels for the side street opposite Cedar Hill Road indicating
eradication of pavement markings.
23. Label "B" at Right turn lane is not correct.
24. Crosswalk across from Inglewood Dr. should be realigned to keep pedestrians
from having to make a turn within the crosswalk.
25. At station 15 +50, the crosswalk should be two parallel 6" lines.
26. At stations 15 +50 and 25 +00, the entrances should have a full width right turn
lanes and proper tapers.
27. At station 15 +50, the label "J" is not correct on the top of the directional island.
28. All Labels indicating "N" should be "O" white arrow.
29. At station 16, the double yellow should be indicated.
30. Label "M" is not described correctly.
31. There should be "Right Lane Must Turn Right" signage and appropriate pavement
markings prior to the lane drop.
32. A signal plan will be needed for Cedar Hill Rd.
33. Any proposed right -of -way needs from other land owners is the responsibility of
the developer and should be indicated on the plan sheet as an easement or
dedication.