Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBates 08158-08163 2015_04_23 Froom Transportation Report Froom/El Villaggio Specific Plan  Preliminary Transportation Analysis    Central Coast Transportation Consulting 895 Napa Avenue, Suite A-6 Morro Bay, CA 93442 (805) 316-0101 April 2015 08158 Central Coast Transportation Consulting April 2015 1Froom/El Villaggio Specific Plan Preliminary Transportation Analysis This report summarizes the preliminary transportation analysis conducted for the Froom/El Villaggio Specific Plan located on the southwest side of Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR) between Froom Ranch Road and Calle Joaquin. The intent of this work was to identify key transportation constraints to assist in the development of the project description and conceptual site plans. This report is divided into two sections: 1. Team/City Staff Meeting- summarizes the agenda and outcome of the meeting. 2. Follow-up analysis evaluating the items called out in the Team/City staff meeting. 1. TEAM/CITY STAFF MEETING The project team met with City Public Works staff on December 4, 2014 to discuss transportation issues relevant to the conceptual site planning. A meeting summary is provided below with the discussion item followed by the summary outcome in italics. Site access and on-site circulation  Home Depot area connection- should occur near Whole Foods market.  Access to Los Osos Valley Road o Primary access control type, location-primary access should be provided opposite Auto Park Way, which has met signal warrant for some time. Roundabout should be evaluated for capacity but does not fit well within corridor. See next section for analysis. o Secondary right-in/right-out access- may be beneficial but may have secondary wetland impacts. Access to Calle Joaquin  Need for CJ connection- will depend on site plan. Concept plan is not expected to add substantial traffic to Calle Joaquin and connection does not appear to be necessary.  Future CJ ramp connections- CJ controlled by the City but if future ramps are connected Caltrans will require project access relocation to avoid wrong-way travel.  Park-and-ride lot accommodation- PNR lot does not conflict with proposed access, would use existing hotel driveway. Consider incorporating PNR spaces on project site if connection provided on CJ. Key Intersections Near Project  LOVR/Madonna  LOVR/Froom Ranch  LOVR/US 101 Ramps  LOVR/S Higuera  Add LOVR/Los Verdes  Add LOVR/Calle Joaquin  Add segment analysis of LOVR  Additional locations TBD Preliminary analysis approach  Trip Generation- review quality of ITE data for Continuing Care Retirement Community and potentially collect traffic counts at a similar facility. See discussion in next section.  Identify project trip distribution from City Model using select zone procedure- confirmed this will help define study area for traffic impact analysis. See discussion in next section.  Review LUCE EIR and other recent documents to determine likelihood of identifying additional impacts- LUCE modeling included 185ksf retail and 115 residential unit growth in project zones—less than was included in the Land Use Element (350ksf commercial and 250 units residential). Preliminary site plan includes less retail and more residential units than LUCE. See Tables 1 & 2 for more details. 08159 Central Coast Transportation Consulting April 2015 2Froom/El Villaggio Specific Plan Preliminary Transportation Analysis 2. FOLLOW-UP ANALYSIS This section compares land uses for the project from multiple sources, the available trip generation data for Continuing Care Retirement Communities, the project trip distribution, and an evaluation of the traffic control alternatives for the primary project driveway. These items were identified in the Team/City Staff meeting described in section 1 above. Land Use Comparison The preliminary project description was compared to the uses in the City’s updated Land Use Element and the land uses included in the City’s Travel Demand Model for the Circulation Element Update. Table 1 summarizes the land uses from each source. The preliminary project description includes more residential units and less retail square footage than both the Land Use and Circulation Elements. The relative trip generation based on these three sources is summarized in Table 2. Note that these estimates are preliminary and are only intended to show the relative traffic levels of the land uses shown in Table 1. The preliminary project description would result in trip levels that are higher than those evaluated as a part of the Circulation Element’s technical analysis, but well below the daily and PM peak hour trips that would be generated at the maximum intensity identified in the Land Use Element. This suggests that the project may result in additional transportation impacts beyond those identified in the LUCE EIR. CCRC Data Quality ITE provides trip generation data for Continuing Care Retirement Communities summarizing four or five studied sites depending on the time period. The trip rates for these sites were relatively consistent, with R2 values (a measure of how well data fit a statistical model, where a value of 1 indicates a perfect explanatory fit and 0 indicates no correlation) of 0.78, 0.70, and 0.99 for the AM peak hour, PM peak Scenario SF MF CCRC Hotel Project Description1 50 300 330 125 170,000 - Land Use Element2 - 250 - - 350,000 - Circulation Element3 - 115 - 139 184,272 16,670 1. Preliminary project description. 2. From Land Use Element section 8.3.2.5 (SP-3). Maximums shown. 3. From land uses in City travel demand model. Reflects growth in Costco/Home Depot area in addition to pro ject site due to the model's TAZ boundaries. Table 1: Land Use Summary Residential (Units) Office (s.f.)Retail (s.f.) Scenario1 Daily Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Project Description 15,600 555 1,354 Land Use Element 21,184 548 1,883 Circulation Element 12,461 307 1,089 1. See Table 1 for scenario descriptions. Table 2: Gross Trip Estimates 2. For comparison purposes only. Trip estimates from I TE using generic internalization rates. 08160 Central Coast Transportation Consulting April 2015 3Froom/El Villaggio Specific Plan Preliminary Transportation Analysis hour, and daily periods, respectively. Given the data quality and that the CCRC constitutes a relatively small portion of site trips, additional data collection is not recommended for this land use. Project Trip Distribution The project trip distribution was based on a select link procedure in the City’s Travel Demand Model, which indicated that 30% of the project trips would travel towards Madonna Road and 70% would travel towards US 101. A plot showing the daily trip distribution is below. The Traffic Analysis Zone structure and roadway loading in the City’s model should be modified when it is applied for project- level analysis to more closely match the proposed site plan loading points. 08161 Central Coast Transportation Consulting April 2015 4Froom/El Villaggio Specific Plan Preliminary Transportation Analysis Intersection Control Evaluation This section evaluates traffic operations at the primary project entry opposite Auto Park Way on Los Osos Valley Road to determine the appropriate control type and lane configuration based on the conceptual project description. Project traffic was estimated using the conceptual project description as shown in Table 3. The project description is expected to change and the trip generation estimates will be refined accordingly. Project internalization and pass-by rates would be estimated in more detail based on the final project description, but are included in Table 3 as a preliminary estimate. The project trip distribution was based on a select link procedure in the City’s Travel Demand Model, as described in the previous section. Cumulative traffic forecasts were developed using the LUCE projections at Froom Ranch Way/LOVR. The forecast growth on LOVR from the LUCE was added to recent counts at Auto Park Way/LOVR, then the project traffic was added to the intersection as described above. The resulting volumes were evaluated under signal and roundabout control. The vehicular service levels are reported in Table 4. The Synchro output sheets are attached and the Synchro files were submitted to City staff via email. In Out Total In Out Total Single Family Residential1 50 units 555 11 34 45 35 21 56 Apartment2 300 units 1,942 30 121 151 119 64 183 Continuing Care RC3 330 units 792 30 16 46 21 32 53 Free-Standing Discount Store4 125 k sq ft 7,155 90 43 133 312 311 623 Shopping Center 5 45 k sq ft 4,041 60 36 96 168 183 351 Hotel6 125 rooms 1,115 49 35 84 43 45 88 Gross Trips 15,600 270 285 555 698 656 1,354 Project Internalization Reduction7 12% 1,872 32 34 66 83 78 162 Pass-By Trip Reduction8 20% 2,239 30 15 45 96 98 194 Total Net New Trips 11,489 208 236 444 519 480 998 3. ITE Land Use Code 255, Continuing Care Retirement Community. Average rate used. 4. ITE Land Use Code 815, Free-Standing Discount Store. Average rate used. 5. ITE Land Use Code 820, Shopping Center. Fitted curve equation used. 6. ITE Land Use Code 310, Hotel. Average rate used. 1. ITE Land Use Code 210, Single-Family Detached Housing. Fitted curve equation used. 7. Reduction based on ITE methods. NCHRP methods yield higher result (>20%). Source: Trip Generation, 9th Edition, ITE (2012) and CCTC, 2014 Table 3: Preliminary Project Description Trip Generation Estimates Land Use Number of Trips Daily AM PM Size 2. ITE Land Use Code 220, Apartment. Fitted curve equation used. 8. Pass-by trip reduction applied to retail com ponents only. 08162 Central Coast Transportation Consulting April 2015 5Froom/El Villaggio Specific Plan Preliminary Transportation Analysis The roundabout would operate unacceptably at LOS F during the PM peak hour. The signal would operate at LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. This suggests that a traffic signal preferable to a roundabout in this location. The needed lane configurations were provided to the design team for their use in preparing a preliminary layout of the Los Osos Valley Road/Auto Park Way intersection. The resulting conceptual design is attached as Appendix B. The eastbound volumes may support a third eastbound through lane, potentially extending from the right turn lane to the west. The need for this additional lane should be evaluated as a part of the project’s traffic study once more detailed traffic volume forecasts are prepared. Enclosures: Appendix A: Queue and LOS Calculation Sheets Appendix B: LOVR/Auto Park Way Geometry Exhibit Intersection Peak Hour Delay1 (sec/veh) LOS 2 Delay1 (sec/veh) LOS 2 AM 16.3 C 12.7 B PM 182.9 F 36.1 D Roundabout Los Osos Valley Road/ Auto Park Way 1. HCM 2010 average control delay in seconds per vehicle. Table 4: Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service Signal 08163