App PB 24 01 West Essex Highlands LLC Traffic Review 1 20240726

Chairman and Members of the West Orange Planning Board West Orange Planning Board Re: Traffic Impact Study and Site Plan – Review #1 West Essex Highlands, LLC e. July 26, 2024 Our File No. 115.WRP0179.V01 Page 4 At the signalized intersection of Eagle Rock Avenue and Laurel Avenue, increase the maximum cycle length to 90 seconds for both the AM and PM Peak Hours The Applicant’s Engineer should indicate how the Crestmont Country Club North Driveway northbound approach will be configured for the intersection. It should be noted that Item #21 of Exhibit D of the Settlement Agreement indicates that West Essex Highlands, Inc. will obtain approval for and install a traffic signal at the intersection of Eagle Rock Avenue and Oval Road. It is our understanding that the traffic signal will be part of a separate planning board application. Should this application for the 496 multifamily residential units be approved, it should be a condition of approval that the traffic signal at the intersection of Eagle Rock Avenue and Oval Road be built prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy. 7. The Applicant’s Engineer indicated that the levels of service under the Build Conditions for all movements is projected to be a Level of Service D or better for both AM and PM Peak Hours. We take no exceptions to this conclusion. 8. The Applicant’s Engineer provided a warrant analysis indicating that Warrants 1, 2, and 3 of the Current Manual on Uniform Traffic Control devices are met. We reviewed the warrants and the volumes in the warrant analysis and were not able to correlate the traffic volumes from the traffic counts to the traffic volumes utilized in the warrant analyses. The Applicant’s Engineer should provide an explanation of how the traffic volumes in the warrant analyses were calculated. The Applicant’s Engineer should review the warrant analysis calculations and revise them as necessary. 9. It should be noted that the settlement agreement indicates the Concept Plan had Kuzik Drive as a means of access ingress/egress and there was discussion within the agreement as to the status of Kuzik Drive going forward in this application as a point of access with respect to RSIS. It should be noted that the plan on sheet SP-7 currently shows a swinging gate on Kuzik Drive. The Applicant’s Engineer should provide testimony on the intentions of Kuzik Drive with respect

to RSIS. It should be noted that the plan on sheet SP-7 currently shows a swinging gate on Kuzik Drive. The Applicant’s Engineer should provide testimony on the intentions of Kuzik Drive with respect to the proposed application and include in the testimony compliance with RSIS. 10. The Applicant’s Engineer provided parking requirement calculations on Sheet SP-3 that are based on RSIS. We take no exception to the parking requirement calculations shown. 11. The Applicant’s Engineer provided parking spaces counts on Sheet SP-3 that do not align with the plans on several instances as follows: