Laserfiche WebLink
3.Response to Comments <br /> Response to Comment E-3 <br /> Commenter notes that table 4.4-2, LOSfor Cumulative with Project Haul Route 1 needs to be <br /> corrected: the Synchro report shows the LOS for EB(B), WB(A), NB (F), SB (F), at the SR- <br /> " 132IMcCraeken intersection. <br /> Please see revised traffic impact study. <br /> Response to Comment E-4 <br /> Commenter states that a summary of the Tables for the Operational Analysis for Trip <br /> Distribution Percentage for Haul Route 3 should be provided. <br /> li Please see revised traffic impact study,which provides additional detail on Haul Route 3. <br /> Response to Comment E-5 <br /> L Commenter states that the traffic volume uses in the analysis need to be converted to a PCE. <br /> Please see revised traffic impact study,which uses PCE conversion. <br /> L Response to Comment E-6 <br /> Commenter states that Traffic Operations does not agree with Fair-Share Calculations shown in <br /> .� Table 7 and Table 8 in Appendix C. <br /> Please see revised traffic impact study. <br /> V <br /> Response to Comment E-7 <br /> Commenter request that provision oflntersection, Roadway Segment,Merge/Diverge and <br /> 6. Weaving LOS summary tables in Appendix C <br /> Please see revised traffic impact study. <br /> L <br /> Response to Comment E-8 <br /> Commenter states that Synchro 6 files must be provided for review. <br /> LThe revised traffic study,with data sheets,has been provided to Caltrans for review. <br /> L Response to Comment E-9 <br /> Commenter states that the volumes shown in Figure 15, study location #7 do not match Synchro 6 <br /> input data. <br /> LPlease see revised traffic impact study. <br /> L <br /> LCemex Vernalis Quarry Mining and Redanu tion Project 3-25 ESA/203015 <br /> Final Emironmental Impact Report June 2008 <br /> L <br />