pf_03283 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

~ 02/15/01 THU 15:45 FAX 651 490 2150 Debra Bloom February 15, 2001 Page 2 SEH IaJ 003 \ It was also noted that the estimated daily number of trips did not change significantly between the 1997 EA Wand the 2001 EA W, despite an increase of approximarely 25 percent in total square footage of business space. Consequently, we developed forecast demands independently of BRW and RLK using the information available in (he provided, documentation. As indicated in Table 2, our forecast demands were significantly higher than any values shown in tlte RLK EA W. . Table 2 Traffic Demand Estimate Comparison Centre Pointe Development Trip Generation in RLK EAW Trip Gel'leration Estimate by SEH Difference Daily (ADT) 7369 8776 +1g% PM Peak HOlJr Total Exiting 930 686 1257 981 +35% i43%, We have attempted to detemrine how BRW in 1997, and as a result, RLK in 2001, developed their trip generation estimates, Although we were unable ro match their results exactly, we were able to derive values witJ:Un 10 percent of those presented it] the EA W. It appears that the majority of the difference between the two estimates is due to the method used ro estimate trips generated by office space. The lTE Trip Generation Manual, the document used in detennining all of the demand estimates. states thac "When the individual buildings are isolated and not related to one another, it is suggested that the trip generation be calculated for each building separately and then summed." It appears that RLK. underestimated the demands primarily because the trip estimations for the office space were calculated on an aggregated basis (all office space combined) rather than on a btrilding-by-buiJding basis. For the 230,000 square feet of office space identified as already built in the table on page 7 of the EAW, the ADT generated would be 2,519 trips if the aggregate (RLK) method is used, and the ADT generated would be 3,717 trips if the building-by-buiJding approach is used. Level of Service (LOS) Analysis After finding a significant difference between our demand estimates and the EA W demand estimates, we distributed the P.M. Peak Hour trips generated by the entire site equally among the three site access points with Cleveland Avenue, at North Centre Pointe Drive, at Lydia Avenue, and at County Road C2. Each of these intersections was then analyzed using Highway Capacity Software to derive an expected level of service based on full development. Neither Brenner Avenue, which accesses Cleveland Avenue from the east, nor Veritas Way. based on the site plan attached to the EA W, appear to be significant P.M. Peak Hour traffic generators; therefore, rhese two intersecrions were not analyzed in derail. The EA W showed a lowest LOS for the side street worse than LOS D at only one interSection - LOS F at North Centre Pointe Drive. On the other hand, our analysis revealed that the left-