O28 Litwornia West Essex Highlands Traffic Report 82225 FINAL

Page 9 Residential parking is a very important aspect of mid-rise apartment complexes. Furthermore this site is isolated from any shopping where residents could walk, this project is not on any bus route, there are no train stations in walking distance for access to the cities therefore parking space variance for either residents or visitors. Residents need motor vehicles to access all services required to live. The applicant proposes hundreds of tandem parking spaces in all four buildings. Tandem parking is not recommended in our opinion. The RSIS states in Section 5:21-1.5 that Planning Boards and Zoning Boards of Adjustment shall insure that any plans and plats comply with the requirements of these rules before issuing a preliminary or final application approval. The word used in the law is SHALL. This development cannot be approved as presently proposed because it violates many rules of the RSIS. The application should not be deemed complete until all the plats include all deed restrictions. More importantly, all property owners are a not part of the application. The roads are currently private. Since the owners are not a part of the application, this application cannot be considered complete and this application should not have been heard. In addition, a licensed surveyor must provide a recent complete site survey before the application can be heard. These plans cannot be approved as submitted. The applicant has provided a dualized roadway in areas that create cul-de-sacs within his new proposed area of development. The applicant has relied on this to create loop roadways using either side of the divided roadways into and/or out of the development. However, the roadways are shown to be 15 foot and 18 foot wide. To be allowed to meet the requirement of a two-way residential street, the roadways must be 20 feet in width on either side of the divider. Even if this is done, it should be remembered that there is still only one way into or out of the development. It should also be pointed out that the developer’s experts, its planner and traffic engineer, both insisted that they were providing loop roadways in the development at the end of the first divided entranceway. The traffic volume at the end of the first divided roadway would be approximately 2,728 vehicles per day using a volume of 5.5 trips per dwelling unit per the RSIS. Remember the present design

nceway. The traffic volume at the end of the first divided roadway would be approximately 2,728 vehicles per day using a volume of 5.5 trips per dwelling unit per the RSIS. Remember the present design requires all housing units to be accessed by driving to the end of the first divided streets. The RSIS states that loop roads will have a maximum traffic volume of 750 vehicles per day. The volume will determine the length of the loop road. Thus, this aspect of a loop roadway is not met. The development is over developed for the slope problem and the amount of housing units proposed. It appears that the maximum number of units would be 180 for this development to be in line with the RSIS as presently designed. Twice this many housing units already exist on West Orange tax maps, leaving no space to add 496 more housing units. The municipality should insist on having a minimum width of 20 feet on each side of the divided entranceway proposed. The RSIS states that the developer should agree on the street widths with the Township. This is a safety concern.