How studies get written — the master report pattern and the voice rules that keep an EIT credible.
Master pattern for every study report (TIA/TIS · safety · calming · parking · shared-parking memo · reduction justification): Purpose/authorization → Study area & methodology (mirrors the approved memo) → Existing conditions → Future conditions (background → build) → Analysis → Findings → Recommendations → Appendices (assumptions log, calcs, counts, comment matrix). One report-section note per section as you draft your firsts — steal skeletons from ACCEPTED reports, your firm’s best precedent per type. Numbers-first discipline: claims carry values + sources; adjectives get deleted in QC (“significant” → “increases delay 18→42 s (LOS C→E)”). Assumptions & limitations: written where the reviewer will find them; a documented assumption is professional, a hidden one is a liability (EIT Boundaries Ethics and Liability). Executive summary · buildout/mitigation sections · meeting summaries — each earns a pattern note after your first accepted one. Two already earned:
- Methodology Memo Skeleton — section-by-section TIA methodology memo with what reviewers check in each section; signed off before counting.
- Comment-Response Matrix Pattern — the five-column matrix, agree/clarify/disagree postures, and the never-silently-skip rule. Voice as an EIT — confident, bounded: state findings plainly within your analysis (“The eastbound left exceeds storage in the PM peak”); route judgment upward explicitly (“Recommend PE review of the signal-modification option”). Never hedge facts; never freelance judgment. In review comments: cite-the-standard phrasing beats opinion phrasing every time (“Per FDM ___, provide ___” vs “should probably”). Tools: Wording Bank and Email Patterns · AI Prompt Library (drafting aid, never source of record).