Laserfiche WebLink
COMMENTS & RESPONSES <br /> <br />C o Ill lllC Il to I' : <br /> <br />Lance H. Bernard, Transportation Planner <br />Anoka County, Public Services Division, Highway Department <br /> <br />Comment Date : July 19, 2005 <br /> <br />Thank you For your response regarding the Brookfield Addition Environmental Assessment Worksheet. <br /> <br />Your comment: Traffic will warrant the need for the City or Developer to build left and right mm lanes at <br />167" and CSAH 5. <br /> <br />Our res/~onse: The City anticipates requiring the Developer to construct turn lanes per Anoka County <br />requirements. 7'he City has provided these comments to the Developer as apart of the City's preliminary <br />plat ~'eview, <br /> <br />Your comment: We would request the city use the Metropolitan Council's Traffic Model or the County <br />TrallSc Model (based on the Metro Council Model) to project future traffic. With the trends occurring in <br />the region we question the trip generation numbers provided in the EAW. <br /> <br />As an example, the Metro Council's Travel Behavior Inventory numbers for Anoka County show an <br />average of 12.3 trips per single-family home are generated from homes in our area. We have found these <br />nttmbe,'s to be a better representation of the trends occurring in the area. <br /> <br />Our re,v~onse: This traffic study is to determine the impacts of this development on the roadway system. <br />The curren! update of the comprehensive plan for the City will determine the future regional impacts of <br />developments that will occur throughout the City. <br /> <br />d stan&trd traffic study should be sufficient to model the impacts of this development to the roadway <br />system. Additionally, the development is likely to have more local than regional impacts since the <br />development will not be a region-wide origin or destination on an average daily basis. <br /> <br />Even with the new trip rate provided above, the peak hour trips are likely to stay the same and off-peak <br />trips would increase. <br /> <br />Your comment: In regards to section 21 of the traffic study, the EAW should consider the cumulative <br />impact it will have on the roadway system with other developments occurring in the area, i.e. Pulte <br />Homes Sommerset Station Subdivision and the Sweetbay Ridge Development. <br /> <br />tn regards to the above comment and section 29, a mitigation plan should be implemented for the <br />transportation infrastructure. This should include the Brookfield Development and future developments <br />occurring in the City of Ramsey. A supporting transportation infrastructure plan should be in place to <br />handle these developments. <br /> <br />Our re.vJonse; The Sweetbay Ridge and BrookfieM Addition were looked at for their cumulative impacts <br />with the Pulte Sommerset Station Subdivision. It was determined that the traffic from those developments <br />that reaches the Sommerset area studied does not add enough traffic to warrant additional analysis. <br />FJ~om analysis, the majority of the traffic from the BrookfieM Addition heads east along Nowthen <br />Boulevard and TII 47, while the majority of trafflc from the Sweetbay Ridge Addition heads south on <br />Ramsey Boulevard. From the studies, the total traffic from the Sweetbay Ridge and Brookfield Addition <br />accounts to the ]bllowing additional trips at the intersection of Alpine and Armstrong: <br /> <br /> <br />