HomeMy WebLinkAboutletter from Peters to McCray on traffic numbersJuly 2, 2001
Mr. Jack McCray
Chenal Properties
#7 Chenal Club Blvd
Little Rock, AR 72211
Bus: (501) 821-5757
Bus Fax: (501) 821-5656
Dear Mr. McCray:
As you requested, we have examined the traffic conditions, associated with proposed land
use changes to the Chenal Properties land use plan, which can reasonably be expected in
the vicinity located between Chenal Parkway, Rahlings Road, Chenal Valley Drive and
Taylor Loop Road. The land use changes proposed call for reductions in intensity, such
as from multi -family to single family, and from commercial to single family. These
changes will have the net effect of reducing the future traffic demand on the existing
arterial street network. The only existing City Master Street Plan (MSP) arterial route
through the area is one shown (but not platted not built) to route from the north (future)
intersection of Chenal Parkway and Chenal Valley Drive (a collector) to the west portion
of Taylor Loop Road (which connects to Highway 10). This planned route is shown on
Exhibit 1, "Existing Master Street Plan." This arterial was not even considered as a
connecting route in the 1995 Chenal Parkway Corridor Study, but the traffic projections
associated with the more intense land uses, now proposed to be reduced, were included as
contributing to Chenal Parkway future volumes. The route shown on the MSP is one
which is not essential as a part of the arterial network, nor will it be necessary to support
the proposed land uses in the vicinity.
The proposed land uses can properly be served with a collector route (La Marche
Boulevard) extension (already on MSP as a collector) to another unnamed collector (also
already on MSP as a collector). This unnamed collector is shown on the MSP as
connecting to the south loop of Taylor Loop Road (already on MSP as a collector) which
logically should continue west via its existing connection to Highway 10, as a collector.
This revised MSP configuration is shown on Exhibit 2, "Proposed Master Street Plan."
Traffic volumes which are projected to occur on the La Marche Boulevard and unnamed
collector routes are consistent with MSP service volumes (MSP calls for a service
volume of 5,000 vehicles per day on collectors) for such classified streets. The Level of
Service "C" on such collectors can be maintained at even higher volumes, in the range of
11,000 to 13,000 vehicles per day. The total traffic volume projected to be generated by
land uses which would be served by the proposed MSP collector routes is less that 7,000
vehicles per day. This data is included on the "Trip Generation" table attached. This
volume would be shared on both La Marche Boulevard and the unnamed collector and
would be somewhat distributed in both directions, resulting in actual likely service
volumes on these routes of no more than approximately 3,000 vehicles per day. Such low
volumes could obviously support even additional vehicle demands from outside the area
which might choose the collectors as "cut through" streets, but this would be discouraged
by there being no direct connecting route and other traffic -calming measures such as
roadway curvature, "T" intersections, etc.
We conclude the proposed changes to the street network coupled with the reductions in
land use intensity (as suggested as possible mitigative action in the 1995 Chenal Parkway
Corridor Study) are appropriate and without adverse impact on the MSP street network.
Please let me know if there are any questions concerning this matter.
PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC.
Ernest J. Peters, P.E.
President
-
1919
z
f.
rK i
�I 1
J
Y
U
Q
z
�
L
J
J
Iii U
f
Y
TM�
�
fe
4
1
�
d
J
Q
W
Q
Q
O
O
J
wzLLI
�
O
CD
J
�
II
II
II
11-14
;-; J
fl
Q
OfU
O
l
IS
rxfLmt"ft
4
d
i
Q Q
W LU
LUO
of
Q Q U
BOO J
�
O
J II 11 II