Traffic Management & Transport Planning Impact Assessments

or combined into an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS.) We have over 15 years experience in preparing TIAs for major commercial, retail, industrial, mixed use, residential, office, hotel, leisure and nursing home developments. All TIAs are prepared in accordance with the Instititution for Highways and Transportation 'Guidelines for Traffic Impact Assessment' and the National Roads Authority 'Traffic and Transport Assessment Guidelines' documents. Our detailed knowledge of the planning system together with our traffic engineering and design skills enable us to produce TIAs which stand up to scrutiny of a potential appeal and/or oral hearing. Our goal is to recommend cost effective mitigation measures which will ensure that the development is considered sustainable from a traffic and transport point of view. We facilitate our clients for the T.I.A (Traffic Impact Assessments) EIA / IEE review of national and international legislation, an in-depth understanding of the proposed development, existing environmental baseline studies, impact assessment and the development of an environmental management plan (EMP) based on the acquired information, to minimize negative impacts and maximize positive effects. TIA & IEE is carried out to determine whether potentially adverse environmental effects are significant or whether mitigation measures can be adopted to reduce or eliminate these adverse effects. We have a competent T.I.A & E.I.A team included highly professional, skilled and motivated Environmentalist, Sociologist and Engineers, to conduct the full EIA study and proper documentation for further submission for Planning & Designing Consultancy services for Engineering Projects. Engineering Project Development Consultant (Pvt.) Ltd has been ranked ‘TOP 25 Fast Growth’ company in Pakistan Engineering Project Development Consultant (Pvt.) Was originally established as a partnership enterprise in 1977 and was then reorganized into a private limited company in 1985 under the companies’ ordinance 1984 with registration 31 – 12 – 17999 and registered with Pakistan Engineering Council and PATP Registration No. Javed Yunas Uppal as Chief Executive Since 1977 the EPDC has been providing comprehensive and ready services in the fields of Monitoring, Evaluation, Planning, Architecture, Civil and Industrial Engineering, Computer applications and management on a variety of projects. The firm has highly qualified and experienced technical personnel thoroughly conversant with application of the most modern technology and knowledge who have worked in foreign countries America, Europe, Middle East and also in Pakistan. Latest computer programs for engineering analysis, management and documentation are available. The firm has main office in Lahore, which is supported by associate offices in Karachi and Islamabad locally and in United kingdom, Germany and Italy Internationally. EPDC has a liaison registered office in Michigan (USA). The firm has undertaken a number of joint venture associations with international companies such as:



LOUIS BERGER INC. NEW JERSEY USA
HIDROSER Sao Paulo, Brazil
ZELLPLAN, Munich, Germany
MERZ AND MCLEAIN AND PARTNERS, Perth Australia
EDD SERNA, Designer, USA

The firm specializes in the Project management, Project designing, Research, Capacity Building, Monitoring and Evaluation, and offers wide ranging consulting service to local government, private ,public and corporate sector institutions donor community ,NGOs and other civil society organizations. The firm is also certified:

ISO 9001-200 CERTIFICATION FROM TÜV SÜD Management Service Ihr Anruf ist kostenlos
0800-5791-5000 [email protected]
CERTIFICATE REGESTRATION NO: 1200 27911TMS

ISO 9001-2008 CERTIFICTION FROM BRE Certification (BRE C) and BRE Global Listed
Bucknalls LaneGarston Watford Hertfordshire WD25 9XX UK
CERTIFICATE REGISTRATION NO: 797

ISO 9001-2000 FROM Bureau Veritas Certification
Kontaktinformation: Bureau Veritas Certification Denmark A/S
Oldenborggade 1B, 7000 Fredericia
Tlf. 77 31 10 00 CETIFICATE NO: 228333A

The firm accepts full responsibility and the challenge offered in the design and management of any type and kind of projects. As such the firm has established its goodwill both in the public and private sector for quality performance and co-operation. EPDC is on the Select list of Consultants Category A, of the Planning and Development, Government of the Punjab, and is also prequalified at various autonomous, semi-autonomous and government agencies. TIA ( TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY: HCM + TRAFFIX
This document describes the method currently in use to evaluate potential impacts of traffic which will be generated by projects. The method is based on comparison of operating conditions at a number of intersections in the vicinity of each new project, at three (or four) different times. These conditions are:
1. Those measured on the streets when The project application is accepted -“existing”
2. Those conditions at some future date without the project ----------“future”
3. When the project is built as proposed ----- “future plus project” and finally,
4. when any required mitigations, if any, have been implemented -------------------- “future plus projectplus mitigations”. The intersections to be studied are selected by staff and/or the consultants. This method is not intended to help planners deal with traffic impacts. It evaluates local congestion and suggests mitigations which increase capacity at isolated intersections only, and does not address the need to reduce demand, which is obviously the only long-term solution to congestion problems. The “existing” conditions include intersections’ geometry, lane configurations and permitted uses, traffic control measures, the number and direction of cars moving through each location at AM and PM peak times of day. The car counts are expressed as volume/capacity (V/C) ratios. These data are then input to a computer model (TRAFFIX) which simulates actual flow conditions. A number of factors must be estimated (or measured) to fine-tune the model, such as incremental delay at arterial stops, frequency of left-turn movements, bus stops, driveway locations, etc. To calibrate the model by actually driving specific routes within the study area. Computer results include projected average delay at each intersection which when added to length of the route divided by the speed limit should approximate the actual drive time. To my knowledge, no calibration is done by Santa Monica consultants. The next step in the analysis is to estimate traffic flow conditions at a “future” time (usually ten years) to define a baseline condition for assessing the impact of the specific individual subject project being analyzed. To do this, the consultants use a “cumulative projects list” which is supposed to identify all projects already approved but not yet built, but which will have been built by the time the subject project comes on line. Such a list is presented in the Traffic Study portion of the EIR for each new project, but most such lists are not limited to approved-but-not-built projects. Review of any such list in past EIRs shows that projects are included which have been denied, withdrawn, are awaiting EIR



completion, or have even been constructed and occupied and thus have already been counted as part of the “existing” traffic counts. For most projects on cumulative projects lists, the only traffic-related information given is the total average daily traffic (ADT) at each site, which may or may not contribute to the traffic flow at the study intersections for the subject project. Examination of worksheets for specific intersections gives no hint of how ADT is converted to incremental impacts of cumulative projects on subject project locations. But somehow the consultants produce a table showing increases in V/C (volume/capacity) at subject project study intersections from the aggregate distributed traffic impacts of all projects on the cumulative list. This table of “future” V/C values also includes a factor for ambient growth – generalized growth in the region not associated with construction of specific projects – usually 1.5% per year. It is worth noting that adding incremental V/C from cumulative projects and ambient growth to “existing” V/C to get “future” V/C usually results in operations at several study intersections moving from acceptable (LOS A-D) to significantly impacted (LOS E-F). Thus, the aggregate impact of projects already approved (cumulative) is projected to result in gridlock at those locations without any additional development in Santa Monica. In fact, for many recent projects, the measured “existing” traffic has been shown to be operating already at significantly impacted conditions of LOS E or F. The next step in the process is to determine the traffic which will be generated by the subject project and its directional components, which are then assigned to study intersections based on anticipated flow patterns. This yields the projected V/C values for “future plus project”. To adopt specific criteria to identify “significantly impacted” intersections, as functions of the incremental differences between “future” and “future plus project” values of V/C, street classification, average vehicle delay and base ADT changes. It is the responsibility of the developer to provide mitigations to improve traffic at these locations to an acceptable LOS D, in conformance with the City’s General Plan goals and the City’s Sustainable City Plan. More often than not, this (achieving LOS D) doesn’t happen because there are no more effective mitigation options available. All the simple things to do (restripe an additional lane, put in a right-turn-only lane) have already been done to mitigate the unacceptable congestion caused by earlier developments. If it appears that there will still be unacceptable “future plus project” impacts at some locations which may be mitigated, the recommended mitigations are entered into the computer model and the program is run again to produce the final LOS table, “future plus project plus mitigations”. For those locations which still remain congested, the developer’s only remaining alternative is to declare a “statement of overriding considerations” to show that the benefits of the proposed project outweigh its unavoidable adverse environmental effects (Note 4). Unfortunately, these findings are often not



formally documented until the staff report is prepared for the Council and therefore are not available for adequate public review. Alternative Methodologies
The currently-used methodology is deficient in that the only measurable data are documented at the beginning of the process (“existing” conditions) and there is no opportunity to validate interim projected conditions. There are too many estimates and assumptions, too few explanations of processes. The methodology was originally used to determine optimum signal timing patterns for specific street intersections, with corollary congestion relief. The methodology now used for SM’s EIR traffic studies is based solely on traffic information at specific street intersections, and the success or failure of proposed mitigations can be assessed only if the suggested changes are focused on those congested locations. Thus the proffered mitigations will likely be one of the following, all aimed at street geometry:
Intersection-specific mitigations
Lane reconfiguration
Turn lanes
Signal selection & timing
Parking infringement, etc. Using such models, mitigations which are not limited to intersection modifications can be tested to determine the effectiveness of:
Non-intersection-specific mitigations, such as:
One-way streets
Over- and under-passes
Reverse lanes (time of day)
Restricted pass through
Event-specific, special purpose passes
Auto-free zones. Promotion of alternative modes


Shuttle, dial-a-ride, jitney, minibuses, Congestion charges, e.g. , Multiple-infraction charges
License revocation, Interzone charges, Aggressive enforcement. The process of analyzing and predicting urban traffic is complicated. It is dependent on development of a model which incorporates a number of subprograms and variable assumptions which differ by location, time of day, demographics, origin/destination patterns, driver characteristics, type of trip, etc. The adequacy of a specific baseline model (“existing”) can be determined only by validating it by conducting calibration runs, a step in the process which the consultants appear to omit entirely. Calibration requires a lot of time and effort and is, therefore, not a popular requirement. However, the current process of starting with “existing” counts which can vary widely, then projecting them forward to an arbitrary “future” time by methods which are never documented, does not lead to confidence in the result. Deliverables:
The following are considered to be the key deliverables for this assignment:
1. Review and submission of TIA report and developing the methodology.
2. Relevant documentation for stakeholders for TIA.
3. Developing the EMMP and TIA reports of Project Review.
4. Submission of TIA report to TEPA and addressing the queries of TEPA and submit the NOC to Client. Time frame: 1.5 Months