COM 0027.052 2000-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

dated September 27, 1999.) Wlth a planned parking lot of 1,068 parking spaces (this is more than 3 tlmes the required amount of 300 for the amount of development assumed In the TIARA) the potential for "fill-in' development of the shopping center appears to be planned, and should be taken Into account. Therefore: (I) Based on points 1, 2 and 3, a background growth rate of 6.5% should ba used. (II) Based on point the analysis should be revised bD Include a "discount superstore" In parcel C rather than a light generator sum as a business park. (iii) Based on point 5, the analysis should be revised to Include at least a light generator such as a business park in parcel D. (~v) Three nearby Intersections (the nearest In the three d~rectlons going out of parcel A) should be Investigated In addition to the Intersection analyzed In the TZAR These study parameters are likely to provide reallsbc traffic performance estimates for the subject Intersection and the three neighboring intersections in year 2008, and guide m the identification of appropriate mitlgabon measures. ANALYSIS with REALLSTiC GROWTH SClNARIOS ~ An analysis was conducted using growth conditlons (i) and (II) as specified above. Since the discount superstore w111 be In the same area as the shopping center, the pass•by trip reduction for the afternoon peak period was also applied to it. For growth condition (iii;, only ha/lofprrcr/D ~s assumed lv be deve%pedwith a GFA pmpor4onal to that for parcels A, 8 and C. The revised trip generatlon and resu font morning and afternoon peak volumes "with project" are attached at the end of this report. Some observations from these tabulations are as follows: • Using Il'E's Parking Generation: I estimated a number parfung stalls which is very close to that in the County Environmental Report. This means that the development assumptlons used are reasonably close to the overall W. H, Shipman development for the regional center. • ProJect•generated traffic is about twice as high as that shown in the TZAR, • Because of the larger background growth rate and tie larger number of trips generated by the project, all morning and afternoon peak volumes are higher than those In the TIAR by about 20% m 15046. The traffic analyses focused on the same ~ntersectlon as In the TIAR and was done for the year 2008 as in the TiAR. The summary Table bNow shows that: 1 Mo•ning peak traffic conditlons are likely to be poor (level of srrvice E) without the j;r-;~t in place. 2 Afternoon peak trai'ric conditions are likely to be Intolerable with the project in place unless a Hilo bound through lane ~s added. Even then, the ~ntenection evel or ~ ITE P~f~"~[ (i[nPw~pl 3" hfin rr 3