Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br />f <br />~ <br />[1 <br /> <br />TRIP DISTRffiUTION AND ASSIGNMENT <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Traffic entering and exiting the site is distributed according to several factors. These factors <br />include the location and size of surrounding land uses, existing street traffic patterns, and <br />the existing roadway system and traffic control devices. All were looked at in determining <br />the directional orientation of the site-generated traffic entering and exiting the site. <br />Figure 9 is an illustration of the new trip directional distribution. The distribution was <br />based on population and employment densities within each Metropolitan Council Traffic <br />Analysis Zone (TAZ) within a 5 and 10 mile radius of the proposed site. <br /> <br />JI.- ~ <br />, <br />r, <br /> <br />~'- <br />:~::.. <br /> <br />Pass-by trips were distributed based on prevailing traffic patterns during the peak hour. <br />Diverted trips were distributed as shown in Figures lOa and lOb. The diverted trip <br />distribution was also based on prevailing traffic patterns. The diverted trips were drawn off <br />of County Road D, County Road C, and 1-35W. It was assumed that the diversion oftrips off <br />of other routes would be minimal. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />Once the trip generation and distribution for a proposed site are known, the projected traffic <br />is assigned to the roadways and intersections. Figure 11 shows the total site-generated <br />traffic associated with each development proposal for the AM. peak hour. Figures 12 and 13 <br />show the P.M. and Saturday peak hour site-generated traffic, respectively. The total site <br />traffic is made up of new, pass-by, and diverted trips. Figures 14 through 16 show the total <br />projected post-development traffic (total site-traffic plus 1996 projected background traffic) <br />at key intersections around the site for each proposal during the AM., P.M., and Saturday <br />peak hours. In addition, background traffic to the existing office development was <br />reassigned where necessary to represent diverted traffic. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Post-development average daily traffic projections for the mixed-use and office development <br />proposals are shown on Figure 17. <br /> <br />. /~.~. <br /> <br />,,~ <br /> <br />. .~.'~~. ..- <br /> <br />27 <br />