HomeMy WebLinkAboutReferral Comments (2)TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
PUBLIC WORKS REFERRAL RESPONSE
DATE: JANUARY 9, 2017
TO: ERIK BERG-JOHANSEN
FROM: SCOTT GILLESPIE
APPLICATION: TIA 16-07 AMAZON CORNER REFERRAL
The following referral comments from Public Works staff reflect a preliminary
evaluation of compliance with applicable approval standards and criteria. These referral
comments include draft findings and recommended conditions of approval, as well as
related informational items, relevant to surveying, engineering, transportation, and
maintenance issues identified by Public Works staff in the context of the applicable
standards and criteria.
These referral comments are intended for review by Planning staff, for incorporation into
the City's written decision on the subject application, however, they do not represent a
final determination of compliance with the applicable approval standards and criteria. It
is acknowledged that these referral comments are subject to revision upon further
coordination with other affected City departments and utility providers.
Staff recommends approval of this application with conditions noted herein.
EC 9.8670 Applicability. Traffic Impact Analysis Review is required when one of the
following conditions exist:
(1) The development will generate 100 or more vehicle trips during any peak
hour as determined by using the most recent edition of the Institute of
Transportation Engineer's Trip Generation . In developments
involving a land division, the peak hour trips shall he calculated based on the
likely development that will occur on all lots resulting from the land division.
The Development is proposed to generate 157 AM peak hour trips and 150 PM peak hour
trips. The applicants engineer determined trip generation rates using the most recent
Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition). The proposed
PM peak hour trip generation exceeds the 100 trip threshold established by EC 9.8670(l).
Therefore this criterion applies and Traffic Impact Analyses is required.
(2) The increased traffic resulting from the development will contribute to traffic
problems in the area based on current accident rates, traffic volumes or
speeds that warrant action under the city's traffic calmingprogram, and
identified locations where pedestrian and/or bicycle safety is a concern by the
city that is documented.
The City does not currently have traffic calming requests in the vicinity of the
development, crash rates do not warrant further study, no speed studies have been
performed to suggest issues with posted speeds and there are no documented pedestrian
or bicycle safety concerns in the vicinity. Therefore this criterion does not apply.
(3) The city has performed or reviewed traffic engineering analyses that
indicate approval of the development will result in levels of service of the
roadway system in the vicinity of the development that do not meet
adopted level ofservice standards.
The City has not performed or reviewed traffic engineering analyses that indicate
substandard levels of service the in the vicinity of the development. Therefore this
criterion does not apply.
(4) For development sites that abut a street in the jurisdiction ofLane County,
a Traffic Impact Analysis Review is required if the proposed development
will generate or receive traffic by vehicles of heavy weight in their daily
operations. For purposes of EC 9.8650 through 9.8680, "daily operations"
does not include routine services provided to the site by others, such as
mail delivery, garbage pickup, or bus service. "Daily operations" does
include, but is not limited to, delivery (to or from the site) of materials or
products processed or sold by the business occupying the site. For
purposes of EC 9.8650 through EC 9.8680, "heavy vehicles " are defined
as a single vehicle or vehicle combination greater than 26, 000 pounds
gross vehicle weight or combined gross vehicle weight respectively.
The proposed development does not abut a street in the jurisdiction of Lane County.
Therefore this criterion does not apply.
EC 9.8675 General Application Requirements An application for Traffic Impact
Analysis Review shall contain each of the items required by the "Standards for
Traffic Impact Analyses" available from the city. An exception to any or all of the
report content requirements listed in the "Standards for Traffic Impact Analyses"
for development that generate less than 100 trips in any peak hour may be
granted if the applicant demonstrates that the study is not necessary in order to
demonstrate compliance with EC 9.8680.
2
The applicant has submitted Traffic Impact Analyses in conformance with the Standards
for Traffic Impact Analysis, the supplemental scoping memorandum and Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) best practice. The study area include roadways within
City of Eugene jurisdiction. The study area and analysis report is consistent with City of
Eugene requirements and Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) recommended
practice. The applicant's engineer adequately described the existing transportation
system and proposed development. Traffic counts were performed at study intersections
during the required peak traffic hour analyses periods to established background patterns.
Trip generation was performed in accordance with the most current Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation handbook (9th Edition). There were no in
process trips identified in the scope of work.
Trip generation was distributed and assigned to the transportation network based upon
existing patterns and professional judgement. No pass-by reductions were proposed. No
internal capture reductions were proposed. This is consistent with residential and
specialty retail uses. A safety and crash summary was provided on all study
intersections. Volume adjustments and level of service calculations were performed in
accordance with industry standards. Current year, build out year, and 5-year planning
horizon calculation were provided per City standards. Queuing analyses was provided.
No exceptions to the report content were proposed. Therefore this criterion has been
satisfied.
EC 9.8680 Approval Criteria
EC 9.8680(1): Traffic control devices and public or private improvements as
necessary to achieve the purposes listed in this section will he implemented.
These improvements may include, but are not limited to, street and intersection
improvements, sidewalks, hike lanes, traffic control signs and signals, parking
regulation, driveway location, and street lighting.
The applicant is proposing to construct multi-story mixed-use building with
approximately 14,000 square feet of retail space and 108 total multifamily residential
units. The proposed development will be constructed on a single tax lot with a total size
of 1.83 acres (Lane County Assessors Map 18-03-08-21 Lots 05900). The lot was
previous occupied with a religious use but was demolished in 2016. The site was
currently vacant and zoned C-2 (Community Commercial).
The property to the north is zoned C-2, developed and consists of an existing stand-alone
supermarket (currently Albertson's). There is no inter lot circulation or cross access
between the lot to the north and the subject property. The properties to the east are zoned
R-1 and developed with existing detached single family dwellings. The subject property
does not abut any streets, drives or public rights of way to the north and east.
The site is bounded to the west by the public right of way of Hilyard Street and 32nd Ave.
Hilyard Street is classified as a Minor Arterial roadway on the adopted street
3
classification map. It is currently developed with 2 travel lanes in each direction,
landscaped medians with turn pockets, sidewalks, street lights, curbs and drainage
controls. The posted speed of Hilyard Street is 30 mph. The Amazon multi-use path runs
adjacent and parallel to Hilyard Street on the west the vehicular way. The Amazon Path
transitions into a wide sidewalk along Hilyard Street at approximately the intersection of
Hilyard Street and 32nd Ave. The site is bounded to the south by the public right of way
of 32nd Ave. 32nd Ave is classified as a local street. It is currently developed with a travel
lane in each direction, traffic calming measures (speed humps), sidewalks, street lights,
curbs and drainage controls. The intersection of 32nd is also channelized with strip left
and right turn movements. The posted speed of 32nd Ave is 25 mph. All abutting streets
are developed to urban standards.
The site currently has 3 points of access to the public street system. Two along Hilyard
Street and 1 along 32nd Ave. The application proposes to keep the northerly driveway on
Hilyard Street and the access to 32nd Ave. The proposed driveway on Hilyard Street will
be shifted slightly to the south. The driveway will be right in right out operation created
by the presence of the existing raised landscape median in Hilyard Street. The slight shift
to the south will enhance and reinforce the access restriction. The traffic study did not
identify any operational or safety issues with the proposed driveway location to Hilyard
Street. The proposed access to 32nd Ave is located at the extreme east side of the
development site and located the furthest distance from the Amazon & 32nd Ave
intersection as possible. The proposed driveway will be full access with no restrictions.
The traffic study did not identify any operational or safety issues with the proposed
driveway location to 32nd Ave. The application proposes to close the 2nd driveway on
Hilyard. The proposed driveway locations are in conformance with the access
management standards established by EC 7.408 through 7.420. The proposed parking lot
provides efficient internal circulation routes and minimizes the need to utilize the public
street system for circulation. Queue lengths are not excessive and do not have a negative
effect on the safety and operations of the adjacent public street system.
The proposed development will generate 57 trips during the AM peak hour of the
adjacent street and 132 trips during the PM peak hour of the adjacent street. PM Peak
hour of the adjacent street is the approved analyses period for the study area per the
approved TIA scope of work. AM peak hour of the generator and AM peak hour of the
adjacent street trip generation was provided in a supplement memo was provided to
address the discrepancy of not including any AM analyses during the AM peak hour of
the adjacent street. This is due to the low trip generation rate for the proposed uses
during the AM peak hour of the adjacent street. The 57 trips did not warrant any off-site
analyses in the study are due because they did not exceed the 50 trip threshold for
warranting additional analyses. Therefore AM level of service analyses was not required.
The applicants engineer provided level of service analyses for the approved study area
intersections, during the approved analyses periods in accordance with the standards of
Traffic Impact Analysis, ITE methodology and the Highway Capacity Manual analytics. .
Traffic counts, trip generation, distribution and assignment were all performed in
accordance with project scoping, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) standards
4
and industry standards.
The applicants engineer analyzed all intersections within the study area. All
intersections, with the exception of Hilyard @ 31st, are expected to operate within
acceptable PM adjacent street peak hour levels of service during the opening year and the
5 year planning horizon. Crash rates at all intersections were below industry standard
thresholds warranting no additional analysis. The applicant engineer identified a
substandard level of service at the intersection of Hilyard and 31st during the opening
year of the development. The applicants engineer proposed channelizing the right and
left turn at the east bound approach of 31st street as mitigation for substandard level of
service. The City agrees with the mitigation and proposes the following condition: "The
applicant shall channelize the east bound approach of 31st Ave to include dedicated right
and left turn lane. Improvements shall include striping and legends in conformance with
City Of Eugene PEPI standards"
To mitigate the substandard level of service predicted for the opening year and 2023, the
applicant's engineer proposes channelizing the right and left turns at the east bound
approach of East 31 st Avenue. The proposed mitigation is anticipated to bring level of
service standards to background levels, which his consistent with the TIA purpose
statement as the mitigation accommodates the traffic impact of the proposed
development.
The current and predicted level of service at East 31 st Avenue is a common occurrence in
developed areas where local streets intersect a higher order street with an established and
appropriately spaced signalized network. Traffic volumes and the close proximity to a
major signalized intersection (30th and Hilyard) create the low level of service at the
intersection of 31st and Hilyard (referred to as "the intersection" for remainder of this
discussion). Local intersections provide access to neighborhoods but are generally not
evaluated and managed for regional mobility. The present day level of service at the
intersection is below the adopted minimum level of service of "D". Annual traffic
growth is expected steadily increase and level of service is expected to steadily decrease
as a result. The development generated traffic will proportionally contribute to the
ongoing degradation of level of service at the intersection.
Industry practice and City standard is to provide mitigations for substandard level of
service. The intersection is already constructed to urban standards within a fixed right-
of-way. East 31 st Avenue is paved 34 feet in width with on street parking, sidewalks,
landscape strips and street trees. The right-of-way is appropriate for the existing street
improvements. The roadway is bounded by park lands, the Amazon Creek corridor and a
developed single-family neighborhood. Hilyard Street is also fully developed at this
intersection with four travel lanes, sidewalks, dedicated turn lanes and other urban
standard roadway treatments as described previously.
The volume of traffic on Hilyard Street and the proximity to the signal at 30th Avenue
makes Hilyard Street the major (dominant) street. Volumes approaching Hilyard on East
31st are substantially smaller than the volume of the vehicles on Hilyard. The intersection
of East 31st is also in close proximity to the major intersection of Hilyard at 30th. This
places the intersection of 31 st and Hilyard within the intersection influence area for the
north bound approach. These factors, including the limitation in street width and
available right-of-way severely limit the mitigation options. The applicant proposes
channelizing the east bound approach to mitigate impacts. This was the obvious and
practical mitigation available given the constraints of a developed intersection.
Signalization or additional traffic controls at the intersection are infeasible due to the
proximity of the traffic signal at 30th and Hilyard. It is poor practice to install traffic
signals in close proximity to one another and would severely degrade traffic operations.
Even if a traffic signal was possible, a mitigation of this expense would also not be
proportional to the impact imposed by the proposed development (especially considering
the development does not generate trips heading east bound on East 31st Avenue towards
Hilyard Street).
Another option for mitigation is to restrict turning movements (i.e. right-in, right-out for
vehicles approach Hilyard Street). However, this is also not a preferred option because
East 31 st is the only local street connection to Hilyard in the vicinity and serves a
significant portion of the neighborhood to the west. Public Works staff also assume that
restricting movements at this intersection would not be supported by neighbors living on
East 31st Avenue. Further, it is not common practice to restrict turns from an adjacent
neighborhood as a mitigation for a development that does not directly access from the
same location.
In summary, there is no practical mitigation to increase level of service that could be
implemented at the intersection of Hilyard Street and East 31 st Avenue beyond the
proposed channelization. Channelization of the east bound intersection approach is the
most appropriate level of mitigation available, and will keep post-development traffic
level of service at the same level that would have occurred without development.
An active pedestrian crossing is also warranted - Dolan findings to be determined by the
City Attorney's office.
Based upon the discussion above and required mitigation, this criterion has been met.
EC 9.8680(2): Public improvements shall he designed and constructed to the
standards specified in EC 9.6505 Improvements -Specifications. The
requirement of improvements based on a traffic impact analysis does not negate
the ability of the city traffic engineer to require improvements by other means
specified in this code or rules or regulations adopted thereunder.
The proposed mitigation at 31st and the active pedestrian crossing are within public
roadways. The required mitigations shall be designed and constructed according to EC
9.6505 Improvements - Specifications. This will be designed and approved through the
City of Eugene PEPI process. The City of Eugene Traffic Engineer will not require any
6
additional improvements based upon other means specified in code or rules and
regulation adopted thereunder.
EC 9.8680(3): In addition to the above criteria, if the Traffic Impact Analysis
was required based on EC 9.8670(4), the improvements shall also address the
structural capacity of the street in the County's jurisdiction and address identified
structural deficiencies, or reduction in the useful life of existing street structures
related to the proposed development. Improvements may he needed to eliminate
the identified structural deficiencies and to accommodate vehicle impacts to
structures.
The development does not abut transportation facilities under the jurisdiction of Lane
County. The criteria of EC 9.8670(4) do not apply. Therefore this criterion does not
apply.
EC 9.8680(4): In addition to the above criteria, if the development is located
within the S-WS Walnut Station Special Area Zone, any increased traffic the
development would generate on streets within the Fairmount neighborhood to the
south of the Walnut Station Special Area Zone shall he mitigated through the use
of traffic calming strategies or other mechanisms designed to discourage such
traffic.
The development is not located within the S-WS Walnut Station Special Area Zone,
Therefore this criterion does not apply.
7