Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Design Day Adjustment <br /> <br />To adjust the study data to design-day levels, the annual transaction data provided by Contractors' <br />Warehouse (for the calendar year 2004) were analyzed to determine the design day adjustment <br />factors needed for each store. As discussed previously, the design-day level chosen for this study <br />was the 5th busiest sales day of the year. To determine the appropriate adjustment factor for each <br />store, the daily transaction total from the 5'" busiest day of the year according to the Contractors' <br />Warehouse data was divided by the daily transactions total that occurred during the study day. The <br />calculations for determining the design-day adjustment factor for the Pomona store are shown <br />below: <br /> <br />Dailv Transactions on Design Dav = Adjustment Factor <br />Daily Transactions on Study Day <br /> <br />Example: <br /> <br />5th busiest day in 2004 had 832 transactions <br />Study day had 753 transactions <br /> <br />832 -i- 753 = Ll05 <br /> <br />Study day experienced a peak parking demand of 99 spaces. <br />Estimated design-day peak parking demand ~ 99 x 1.105 = 109 spaces <br /> <br />Conducting the study in October appears to have been successful because the Montebello store had <br />more transactions on the study day than even the busiest day in 2004. Without having the <br />transaction totals for 2005, it was therefore assumed that the study day was the busiest day of2005. <br />Therefore, the peak parking demand for the Montebello store was factored down to represent the 5th <br />busiest day. <br /> <br />Table 5 shows the peak parking demand observed on the study days as well as the peak parking <br />demand calculated for the design day (the 5th busiest day of the year) and for the busiest day. As <br />shown in the table, the calculated design-day peak parking demand is higher than that observed on <br />the study day for both stores. Based on the daily transaction total ofthe study day, the peak parking <br />demand calculated for the 5th busiest day includes 1 I more occupied spaces than during the study <br />day at the Pomona store. Since the Montebello store harpened to be studied on the assumed <br />equivalent of the busiest day of the year for that store, its 5t busiest day peak parking demand is 9 <br />spaces fewer than that observed on the study day. Also shown in the table, none of the design-day <br />peak parking demands exceeded the capacities of the store parking lots, and neither do the busiest- <br />day peak parking demands. In fact, both stores have about 30 or 50 more parking spaces than would <br />be needed on the 5th busiest day. <br /> <br />Table 5 - Peak Parkin!! Demand on Study Day, Desi!!D Day, and Busiest Day <br /> Parking Peak Peak Parking Peak Parking Excess Parking <br /> Parking Demand Demand <br />Store Total Capacity Demand Calculated Calculated Capacity" <br /># Store Name Parking Available Observed for for the based on <br /> Capacity on Study on Study Design Day Busiest Day 5th and 1st <br /> Day Day (Sit. Busiestl Busiest Day <br />703 MONTEBELLO 113 113 88 79 88 34 25 <br />705 POMONA 185 163 99 109 116 54 47 <br />. <" , <br /> <br />Parking capacity available on study day minus the peak parking demand for the 5 or 1 Busiest Days <br /> <br />Parking Study of Two Contractors Warehouse Stores - Final Report <br /> <br />Page 10 <br /> <br />A-18 <br /> <br />31A-36 <br />