Wednesday, July 18, 2001
|
Wednesday, July 18, 2001 |
|
PTC traffic study based on flawed assumptions There were a few of us that noticed some flaws in the traffic data gathered in March 2001 by the city's traffic consultant, URS Corp. Many of the figures failed to add up. I began asking what methodology was used to collect the data and the city staff did not know. A few days later some concerned citizens and I were invited to a meeting at City Hall that was held on June 26, 2001. The e-mailed invitation stated, "City staff has asked Mr. Ellis (traffic consultant) to report on the methodology used in the intersection counts and model update (for the Ga. Highway 54 traffic model), to provide a reasoned defense of both and explanation of the results." It was pretty clear to me that this meeting was going to be an explanation on how the big box retail stores just barely passed the traffic model again. As you read in the newspapers last week, my assumption was correct. We asked Mr. Ellis if the traffic counts were flawed and he said yes. He then stated that there was a 10 percent margin of error on the counts. Only two of the intersections had been counted by mechanical means. It is very important to remember that computer models are full of assumptions. URS Corp. plugged the assumptions into the computer for the city. URS Corp. also did the traffic study for The Avenue development, so they are playing on both sides of the fence. There is a specific designation that is plugged in for a gas station, a Home Depot, a restaurant, but there is no model classification for something like The Avenue. The Avenue is a new concept and does not fit into any of the existing categories so URS Corp. literally had to guess on outcomes for that development. I questioned Mr. Ellis on why he issued a 30 percent "pass-by" rating for The Avenue. This means that he believed that 30 percent of the patrons at the development were merely stopping by to shop on their way to somewhere else. Several us at the meeting thought that the figure was much too high. If you add the 30 percent to the 10 percent margin of error, you have up to 40 percent of the automobiles discounted from the model in relation to that project. Later, I began questioning anyone that would speak to me to see if they left their homes just to go shopping at The Avenue. Everyone I spoke to said it was his or her destination. Would an additional 40 percent ruin Wal-Mart's chances? I never liked the fact that URS Corp. makes a great deal of money from doing traffic studies for big box store developers around the country and now they have to be objective all of a sudden. However, there is nothing that can be done at this point without a large funding source to pay for an independent study. Traffic is actually number three on my list on why big boxes hurt the community. Crime is the first. Everyone who has read the Jan. 7, 2001, transcript of "60 Minutes" on crime and cover-up at Wal-Mart stores knows what I am talking about. The whole process with the Traffic Impact Ordinance, our attorney making deals with their attorney, the assumptions within the computer model, flawed traffic counts and margins of error reveals an acute deficiency in objective reality. The city neglected to devise long-range plans on how to handle further development and yet still maintain the charm of Peachtree City. However, even with the forward thinking of the big box ordinance, we still fell prey to Mayor Lenox granting exemptions to all the big box development sites. The elections in November 2001 will determine our city's direction for the future. Please register to vote, study the issues and ask questions of the candidates. Steve Brown Peachtree City
|
||