Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout981653.tiff PFELSBURO rg HOLT ULLEVIG engineering paths to transportation solutions August 14, 1998 Mr. Don Carroll Weld County Public Works Department P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632-0758 RE: Beebe Farms Draw Traffic Review FHU Reference No. 98-161 Dear Mr. Carroll: We have completed our traffic engineering review of the proposed Beebe Draw Farms PUD Master Plan and traffic impact study for the development to be located between WCR 32, WCR 38 and WCR 39, east of Platteville. This letter provides our comments on both the traffic study (prepared by Matthew J. Delich, P.E., in May 1998), and the plan. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY In general, the traffic study prepared for Beebe Draw Farms is complete and was prepared using the most recent trip generation and intersection capacity techniques. Trip distribution estimates are also reasonable. We do offer the following comments: • A growth rate of 3 percent per year was assumed in the study to project background traffic volumes for Phases 1 through 5 (years 2001 through 2006), of Filing 1 . This growth rate was based upon traffic projections on similar facilities as documented in the 2015 NFR RTP. We conducted further research in the 2015 UFR RTP, and determined that a growth rate of 3 percent per year is reasonable. Additionally, a brief sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the growth rate which could occur before operations would drop to LOS D given the recommended improvements. It was estimated that a background traffic growth rate of between 10 and 15 percent per year could occur before operational analyses at the two relevant intersections would drop to LOS D by the year 2020. So while a 3 percent annual growth rate is reasonable, there will be ample reserve capacity for even more growth given the recommended improvements. 0 3.721.1440 0,x 303.7'4081' thoo1iuciigroiu (lrccmcoo,I(',,rp,rarc I'laa 795 I Ii. Mile Aye. S(,. '_00 'fV vA ( C1-±G( ( U 9011 I J " 1\ry nl August 14, 1998 Mr. Don Carroll Page 2 • No trip generation was documented in the study for the recreational use of Milton Reservoir or the proposed cross country jumping course. These trips would impact the collector roadway which bisects Filing 1, as well as its intersection with CR 39. However, the golf course and residential trip generation were both conservatively estimated given the remoteness of the site. The golf course trip generation documented by ITE is indicative of sites which primarily attract external trips; residents of Beebe Draw Farms will most likely be the primary source of patrons at the golf course. In addition, the residential trip generation used is for single family detached homes in urban areas. Trip generation rates for more rural, residential areas tend to be less because drivers make fewer trips to/from home, making all of their necessary trips while they are out. Therefore, the conservative trip estimate of the golf course and residential areas should approximately offset trip estimates associated with the reservoir and cross country course uses. The acceleration/deceleration lanes recommended in the study are based upon the current State Highway Access Code (SHAG), and were found to be moderately conservative. The following comments summarize our review of these recommendations. • The recommendation in the report is to build a northbound, right-turn deceleration lane on CR 39 at the site access during Phase 3, and a southbound, left-turn deceleration lane on CR 39 at the site access during Phase 5. Since both of these recommendations are based upon conservative interpretations of the SHAC, it is our recommendation that the left-turn deceleration lane be built during Phase 3. Left-turns present a greater safety hazard as they must turn across a lane of on-coming traffic, have the potential for conflict with traffic turning out of the site access, and pose a greater threat for rear- end accidents if made from a shared lane. • Figure 22 of the study depicts an exclusive right-turn lane from southbound CR 39 to CR 32. The study suggests that construction of the lane be cost-shared based on traffic loading. This translates into a 65/35 split, with the developer being responsible for the larger portion. However, this lane would not be necessary if the development does not occur. As such, there is a basis for requesting 100 percent participation for the lane. • Additionally, in Figure 23, the study recommends further construction of turn lanes at the two relevant intersections for the long term time frame (build out). These construction costs could also be divided based upon the origin of the traffic entering each of the intersections. At the intersection of CR 38/CR 39, it is estimated that approximately 75 percent of the traffic will be generated by the site, and the remaining 25 percent can be attributed to background traffic. Similarly, at the intersection of CR 32/CR 39, it is estimated that approximately 80 percent of the traffic will be generated by the proposed development, and the remaining 20 percent will be background traffic volumes. Again, these improvements are not necessary if the development does not occur and it may be reasonable to request the developer to fund 100 percent of the improvements on this basis. The traffic study did not offer an improvement phasing plan for the long term improvements needed at site build out (past Filing 1). August 14, 1998 Mr. Don Carroll Page 3 Another consideration is the intersection of US 85/CR 32, approximately 7 miles west of the proposed development. This intersection is being studied as part of the US 85 Access Control Plan and is being identified for potential signalization in the future. At build out of the proposed Beebe Draw Farms development, most of the side-street demand relative to satisfying the signal warrant at this intersection, would be generated by the development. Therefore, it may be reasonable for the County to request a financial contribution from the applicant towards the future signal installation. PLAN REVIEW The PUD master plan was also reviewed for meeting general traffic engineering principles. From observing the plan, only one area of concern was identified, relative to access locations. A field trip to the proposed site location identified these concerns regarding the proposed site accesses: • The main CR 39 access is proposed to be located approximately 1 .5 miles north of CR 32, approximately half way between CR 32 and CR 38. There is an existing dirt access at approximately this location with a sign identifying it as the future access to the Beebe Draw Farms development. If the location of the existing dirt access is the exact location of the proposed future access, there is a sight distance concern looking to the north, up a slight hill. We suggest that the proposed intersection be evaluated closer to ensure that proper intersection sight distance will be provided. • There is a future proposed site access on CR 32, located approximately one-half mile east of CR 39. Without being able to determine the exact location of this proposed access, there is concern of adequate sight distance to the west where a slight hill exists in the existing roadway. This too should be carefully reviewed for adequate intersection sight distance. Some other field observations were also made: • CR 39 and CR 32 are both projected to be built out as collector roadways. The Weld County Subdivision Ordinance (173E) states that collector roadways should have a ROW width of approximately 80 feet. It was estimated from the field observations that these roadways have ROW of between 50 and 60 feet. These widths should be checked, and additional ROW dedicated as necessary. The County should also consider requiring construction of one-half a collector roadway along the site's roadway frontage. • CR 38 should be paved when access to Beebe Draw Farms is provided onto this road. August 14, 1998 Mr. Don Carroll Page 4 If you have any questions, or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG a- 4 F4 Debra L. Zermuehlen, E.I. Christopher J. Fasching, P.E. Transportation Engineer Senior Transportation Engineer Hello