Agenda - Council - 02/27/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I Discussion on Elmcrest Park Access Brian E. Olson, City Engineer Initial Discussion It is the intent of this study to determine how many and what access points are available to the proposed Elmcrest Park property. The following discussion will take a look at the advantages and disadvantages of each potential access point and give an approximate cost for each access. Following the discussion of each access location will be a recommendation for best access as far as on site circulation and access. Elmcrest Park is approximately 94 acres in size. According to the trip generation tables a City park would generate approximately 3.66 vehicle trips per day per acre (vtpdpa). Although this is the average, the generation tables indicate that varies on the use of the park. The range is 1.04 - 129.52 vtpdpa. For the purposes of this estimate, Staff will assume utilization of the park as illustrated in the Concept Plan One dated August 14, 2000. Staff will assume a higher amount of traffic for the idle space of 5 vtpdpa and add 10 vtpdpa for the recreational bali fields. The total amount of vehicle trips would be approximately 1,410 vehicle trips per day, Monday thru Thursday, during the peak recreation season. Options Access Number #1: This access is the continuation of 163rd Lane to the east and would provide access to the site from the west through a residential neighborhood. Initial reaction to the access was not well received from some of the adjoining neighborhood, however, would be less of an impact with the addition of an access from Hwy 4.7. If tl~is was the sole access to the park and the park was fully developed, there would be approximately 2,800 vehicles traveling through the residential neighborhood. Advantages: · Provides access to park from residential neighborhood. · Residents of the immediate neighborhood would not have to drive onto 160th and Hwy 47 to access park. · Purchase of land would not be necessary as we would utilize an existing right-of way. · Sight distance and alignment to existing street system is optimal. · Grade of access would be gradual. · Least costly of all options. Disadvantages: · Extreme burden on the local street system. · Loss of trees. -233-