HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit Miscellaneous 1987-7-9
:J}~
in_ '.. .~.
oil " ;;. i;
~\:< ',"\
. ..-.,
.
.
_~~1~ t1t/ttevn \1
FINAL
ORDERS
SPRINa~liELD :
~ .ofthe '
~ ~ [Springfield Planning Commission
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
'OF THE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
. . .. I: ,\ 'l~,.
";~~;fJ.,t
j. "';:,:.'
..L~.,.'. ''. '
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO
SECTION 32.080(3) TABLE
32-4 OF THE SPRINGFIELD
DEVELOPMENT CODE
t----
t
t
t
JO. NO. S-87-07-95
FINDINGS, CONCLUSION
AND OR DER
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
The application is _ for
Springfield Development
614.
a Variaoce'to Section 32.080(3) Table 32-4 of the
Code for Lot ,5 of Sycan Commercial Park, Fill' 73 Slide
1. On July I, 1987, the followin9 application for Variance in the southeast
corner of Gateway Street and Kruse Way was accepted:
"
Chevron U.S.A. (Jo. No. 87-07-95) Lot 5 of Sycan Commercial Park, File 73
Slide 614.
-';
Request for Variance to Section 32.0BO(3) Table 32-4 of the Springfield
Development Code to allow the construction of a driveway on Gateway Street
at a distance from an intersection less than that permitted by tbe
Springfield'Development Code. Section 32.08(3) Table 32-4 requires 200 feet
of separation between driveways on the same side of the street.
2.
The application was initiated and submitted in accordance with Section
3.050 of the Springfield Development Code. Timely and sufficient notice of
the Variance request hearing, pursuant to Section 14.030 of the Springfield
Development Code, has been provided.
3.
On August 5, 1987, a public hearing on the Variance request was held. The
Planning & Development Department staff notes and recommendation, as amended
by the Planning Commission, together with the testimony and submittals of
the persons testifying at that hearing have been considered and are a part
of the record of this proceeding.
CONCLUSION
. ,\,
On the basis of this record, the requested Variance is consistent with the
applicable criteria set forth in Section 11.030(a-e), and Article 31 of the
Springfield Development Code. This general finding is supported by the specific
findings of fact and conclusions set out in the attached findings of fact adopted
August 5, 1987 (Attachment "Staff Report") and the findings and conclusions
suhmitted hy the Applicant (Attachment "A") and attached hereto.
r
"
'~:",,".lI- ....
,_.-;.....;....
.
ORDER
.
It is ORDERED' by the Planning Commission of Springfielrl, that approval of Jo. No.
87-07-95, Variance, be GRANTED with the following conditions:
1. The dri veway wi 11 be a joi nt use dri veway with 22' 5" deve loped on lot 5 and
22'S" developed on lot 4 to be constructed concurrently;
2. the applicant and owner shall enter into a joint use maintenance agreement
for the use of the driveway, the agreement will be submitted to staff prior
to development proceeding;
3. all future development" of lot 4 will be limited to the single joint use
dri veway.
THIS ORDER was presented to and approved by the Planning Commission on August 5,
1987.
. ATTEST
A YES: 5
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 2
ABSTAIN: 0
~,_ .4~~,
Pla~ ~ommlsslon ~ha~person
C:H41~
'.-'~':[~:;.~.;"";:X;-~"/r : ",~_:j,.,..~~.
".
.
STM'J:i' ~PRA:GF:LD
REPORT-=~
.
Springfield Planning Department
VAR lANCE
STAFF RE PORT
Applicant - Chevron U.S.A. Jo. No. 87-07-95
Reouest for a Major Variance to allow the construction of a driveway on Gateway Street
at a distance from an interspction'less than that pprmitted b.y Section 32.080(3) Tahle
32-4 of the Sprinqfipld Development Code. Lot 5 of Sycan Commprcial Park as recordpd
on File 73 Slide 614.
BACKGROUND
The applicant is proposi~g to construct a service station and market in the southeast
corner of Kruse Way and Gateway,Street. The proposed driveway access on to Gateway
Street is approximatply' 130 feet from the intersection of Krusp and Gatpway. The
Developmpnt Codp standard rpquires a minimum of 200 fept.
SITE INFORMATION
Thp dpvelopment site is a vacant one acre parcpl in Sycan Commprcial Park. Thp parcpl
has 160 feet of frontagp on Gatpway Street and 222 feet of frontage on Kruse Way.
Properties north, east and snuth arp undpvploppd and arp a part of this suhdivision.
On thp wpst is the Red Lion Motel. All adjacent propprty is zoned Community
Commercial.
When this subdivision was approved, thp Planning Commission grantpd a variance to t~p
strpet separation standard (Krusp Way and thp Rpd Lion Motpl driveway) but conditionpd
thei,r approval on; thp installation of a traffic signal at thp intprspction of Gateway
Street and Kruse Way; the inst~llation of a traffic signal at East Beltline ~nd Hutton
Street, and; limiting access from individual lots on to Gateway Strppt. This latter
condition was to hp evokpd on a case by case hasis as devplopment proposals were
sUhmittpd.
BAS)S FOR DECISION
Section 11.030, Article 11 of thp Springfield Devplopment Code provides as follows:
"Except as sppcifipd in Suhsection (2) of this Spction, a Minor or Major Variance
Shall be grantpd if the proposal is determined by the Approval Authority to meet each
of the following criteria:
(a)
Thpre are unusual
make it impractical
this Code.
conditions assnciated with the property or structure which
to use the development area fnr its intended purpnse under
'(b) Granting of thp Variance wnuld not be inconsistent with the Mptro Plan and this
Code.
Ic) Granting of the, Variance, would have no significant adverse affects on the
puhlic welfare or neighboring properties, and there are provisions to mitigate
those adverse affects which shall be a condition of use.
.~ . _.: '.~..~.-... "';,-~":" .
.
.
(d) The need for the Variance has not arisen solely from a previous Code violation;
i.e., the hardship is not self-imposed.
(e) There are no other practical alternatives available that better meet the
provisions of this Code or the Metro Plan.
FINDINGS
(a)
make
Code.
There are unusual conditions associated with the property or structure which
1t 1mpract1cal to use the development area tor 1ts 1ntended purpose under this
The applicant has suhmitted general findings which address this criterion (see
Attachment "A"). The configuration of the property at the time of subdivision
required the location of Kruse Way to be at a point that would create the most
efficient and practical lot design. This resulted in a reduced north south lot
dimension along Gateway frontage. The east west frontage on Kruse could not he
increased sufficiently, to allow two driveways without eliminating the parcel
immediately east. This design, although the most efficient for subdivision
purposes, does impose' some limitations on access design, ioternal circulation and
building area.
In applying this criterion to this proposal it should be noted that the standard for
driveway separation is designed to accommodate high traffic volume generators, i.e.,
worst case scenario. This is arguably unfair because it does not consider low
traffic volume uses. As it applies to this standard, a low traffic volume use could
he coosidered, in the abstract, as an unusual cooditioo. However, it should be
underscored that a stricter standard that is reduced is preferable to an originally
weak standard.
(b) Granting of the Variance would not be inconsistent with the Metro Plan and this
Code.
The applicant has not suhmitted findings which directly address this criterion.
TransPlan policies call for limiting access to arterial streets to expedite' traffic
flow and reduce, the possibility of hazardous intersections. The Development Code
implements this policy by requiring minimum separation hetween driveways and streets
and encouraging joint use driveways where this design'is preferable. However,
limiting this site to a single access would effectively limit the buildable area
because additional on site maneuvering would he necessary. This in turn would
result in a reduction in the types of uses (otherwise permitted in this zone) that
could occuPy this site. Metro Plan policies promoting economic development and
efficient utilization of land can be accommodated without contradicting TransPlan
policies through design control, i.e., signalizatioo of Kruse Way aod Gateway
Street, joint use driveways.
Jc) Granting of 'the Variance would have no siQnificant adverse affects 00 the
publiC welfare or neighboring properties. and there are provisions to mitioate those
adverse affects which shall be a condition of use.
,..
.
.
The applicant has submitted findings which- address this criterion ~nd to which staff
concurs (see Attachment UAU). Two driveways expedite traffic mnvements off of both
streets thereby eliminating excessive internal maneuvering and potential congestion
at a single driveway.
(d) The need for the Variance has not arisen solely from a previous Code violation;
l.e., the hardship is not selt-imposed.
The applicant has not submitted findings whiCh address this criterion, however,
there is no previous Code violation and the hardship is not self-imposed.
(e) There are no other practical alternatives available that better meet the
proviSions ot thiS Code or the Metro Plan.
The applicant has submitted findings which address this criterion and to which staff
generally concurs (see Attachment UAU). The applicant's findings state a joint use
driveway shared by the lot to the south would result in conflicting movements that
would not exist if each lot had a separate driveway. The applicant goes on to say
that another traffic analysis would he needed before such statements could be made
conclusively. Staff. agrees that. a joint. use driveway would result in some
conflicting movements and that additional analysis would hear this out. However,
there are -several factors apparent that would support a joint use dri veway; the
proposed use does not generate high traffic volumes; the proposed use has a driveway
on Kruse Way; the subdivision was constructed with what amounts to an acceleration -
deceleration lane on Gateway Street that allows customers to access this property
without appreciably disrupting the flow of northbound traffic; the Development Code
allows wider driveways when it is determined that this additional width will result
in a safer and more efficient design. It. is staff's' judgment that these know!'
factors, in the absence of another analysis, give credence to a joint use driveway.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
The application for variance is consistent with the applicable provisions of the
Springfield Development Code and the Metro Plan. Staff recommends approval of this
request based on findings found in this report and those submitted by the applicant
(see Attachment UAU) providing the Gateway Street driveway is d"signed as a joint use
driveway with the property immediately south. It is further recommended that the
applicant be - allowed to construct a driveway that temporarily serves only their
property, but must be modified for joint use at the time the property to the south is
developed.
" -~ -' - .~... '.
r.o
.
A I I .CHMENT "A"
r-
I
r
,
I
- TRANSPORTATION
IMPACT ANALYSIS
!
I
r CHEVRON U.S.A., INC.
! SERVICE STATION
AT
! . GATEWAY STREET IK.RUSE WAY
l
Springfield, Oregon
,
i
t-
I
t
I
L
I
,
,
c.
~
KJT1EI.SON . ASSOCIATES
July 1987
j"
,-
I
I
I
r
I
i
,.
L
"
.
.
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS
for
CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. SERVICE STATION
Gateway Street & Kruse Way
Springfield, Oregon
Prepared for
Chevro~ U.S.A. Inc
P.O. Box 220
Seattle, Washington 98111
Prepared by
Kittelson & Associates
512 SW Broadway
Portland, Oregon 97205
(503) 228-5230
July 1987
Project No. 116.00
,
.',
.
.
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
EXISTING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1
Surrounding Land Uses and Transportation Facilities 1
Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . 3
Current Levels of Service . . . 3
Pedestrian and Bicycle Activity 7
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . 8
Site-Generated Traffic Volumes . . . 8
Analysis of Alternative Access Plans 10
Access Drive Design Considerations
Access Alternatives
Level of Service Calculations
Recommended Access Locations 17
Shared Access on Gateway Street . 18
-i-
'.
.
.
FIGURES
1. Preliminary Site Plan . . . . . . . 2
2. Existing Traffic Volumes - P.M. Peak. 4
3. Total Traffic Volumes - 1987 P.M. Peak Alt.l 13
4. Total Traffic Volumes 1987 P.M. Peak Alt.2 14
5. Total Future Traffic Volumes - P.M. Peak Alt. 3 15
TABLES
1.
General LOS Descriptions (Unsignalized)
5
2.
LOS Criteria (Unsignalized)
6
3. Summary of Service Levels at Key Intersections
Existing Conditions - P.M. Peak 7
4. Chevron U.S.A. Station Trip Generation 9
5. Summary of Service Levels at Key Intersections -
Existing + Site Conditions - P.M. Peak . .. . 16
6. Summary of Service Levels at Key Intersections -
Future + Site Conditions - P.M. Peak. . ., . 17
-11-
; 00
I
I .
,"
r
.
.
INTRODUCTION
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. is planning to construct a new service
station at the southeastern corner of the Gateway Street/Kruse
Way intersection in Springfield, Oregon. Figure 1 illustrates
the proposed preliminary site plan for the service station.
Kittelson & Associates was retained to analyze the likely traffic
impacts of the proposed service station on the safety of
operations in the immediate area. Also, Kittelson & Associates
reviewed the sit~ plan with respect to the City of Springfield
minimum requirements for driveway/intersection spacing. This
report sets forth. the consultant's findings pertaining to future
traffic volumes and their impacts on the nearby street system.
The analysis was conducted following the review of the
preliminary site plan (revision dated 6/3/87), a previous traffic
impact analysis for a proposed Chevron station that was to be
located on the northeast corner of this same intersection
(prepared by Wayne T. VanWagoner & Associates, Inc.) and
documentation on the variance granted for the placement of Kruse
Way.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
The land area adjacent to the proposed service station consists
of commercial zoned properties. Generally, the properties on the
western side of Gateway Street have been developed while the east
side properties near Kruse Way are currently vacant. The
existing highway orientated commercial establishments in the area
include service stations, restaurants and hotel/motels. The
existing commercial establishments have access along Gateway
Street.
Gateway Street is an arterial roadway which serves the traffic
between Springfield and the Belt Line/I-5 freeway facilities plus
provides access to adjacent properties. Gateway Street, adjacent
to the site, currently has a five lane urban section. The
pavement is delineated with two through lanes in the southbound
direction, a center two-way left turn lane, and a through lane
plus an exclusive right turn lane for Kruse Way in the northbound
direction.
-1-
,'-
KRUSE WAY
.","
'f'
,
~l
t
I
-I
( . ~, ~I~=-'
I
1---1
(I 'il
'~r-~
'll
. 'k....
----.(1- ~_c_.__
'-, ,;
\ t--
--&j'
.....-.1 {"~&.c""'..Dlo1'1"'"
.. '
_..-.........,d_ ~.
r,--.-1-~- ~- .1. I.
8-~-'::'r-'--~;
.,_u___..n. .~..\
"'
-~~---
~
~\
I~
"----'
(
-- ___.,_.t_.
~
,
I
/-....-....-
/' ~ ---_:.......:.-
....-:
,/
1-'-
.
.,(..,....;
....... ........
I c.. 0 v
N 21
I C:I: m
-m
< < r-
"21 !
COO z
CDZ ~
.... 21
en -<
"ll
21 !!!
z ...
CO) m
." "
m r-
r- ~
C Z
0
21
-
...
., ., .....0
C
~
,. ..
~
t-
W
W
a:
t-
lJl
>
<t
;;:
W
t-
<t
Cl
!:!=-:;z:1
L..... ;.~
-"-
fr....".un......
--li-"'"
Jl
,0,:)1
,
'j
~..........,.. lJ'
) ~.._._-
~' ~f~~f:}~
..,.,.b,......
....t.!".';i.
,.z-r-r"t"i.
.,' ;l "~'J
r,':i,Ja
--- - _.._ .~~~& I
t;n":'l"'- . ':
........ ,..... ~ _....... ",.11/1--.,.6
..c.._--.... u:t T-..,~
\~~-::li; .~ "';;;tJ 1
\ Irrk.I,:,.... "
"'I ' .. II
~'--
\- I)_I
\_-----
-,....-.-
~
L--...._....__~
I __~eu...
I
I
I
I
I
,
......... ~.
.,.....,~.l..~...._
I
.
I
". f
-
". ...,...,;
"c..._
o
~.I
-
...
..."-..........
-'_r""",",,",
lAHD5CA~f: III'OUIREIIIHT.
_.,.
.ITBACIl 1l10UIRI'III:NT.
SITE PLAN
~
(D
;;;;Ii 2::-~A-- I~~
,..... .n...,.,..n.!!...~'L
.""'" ..._....u._._.
~;:t~f.~~M.,;t:1:~.( .....: :10.....'
...~..... ... ........ ...
~"""~~tt_I"'_.1
...~~.-~I"f _.....
1
.' _'~.1.. ~..... n ......, _.-.
---~....,...-~._.......
....-...~-
...._-~..-, -....-
.-....-..- -.-
~ll!-"lIf"I"'T.
~""..-_..........::.._-.-.._.
I!-.........-....
---
------_._~-
1-'
I.
.
.
I
r
I
Kruse Way is a collector street that will serve traffic expected
from future developments to the east of Gateway Street. The
Kruse Way pavement currently extends about 200 feet to the east
of Gateway Street. The Gateway Street/Kruse Way intersection is
controlled by a stop sign on the Kruse Way approach.
r
I
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Manual turning movement counts were conducted by Kittelson &
Associates on May 11, 1987, at. the Gateway Street/Kruse Way
intersection area. The counts were conducted during the mid-day
(11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.) and p.m. peak (4:00 to 6:00) periods.
The time periods counted represents the daily "peak" traffic
period at the commercial establishments in the area.
The traffic volumes recorded during the p.m. peak period were
about 25 percent, higher than those observed during the mid-day
peak period. The p.m. peak hour was observed to occur between
4:30 and 5:30 p.m. Figure 2 shows the existing p.m. peak hour
traffic volumes at the adjacent intersections and driveways. The
remainder of this report analyzes traffic conditions expected for
this critical time period.
CURRENT LEVELS OF SERVICE
Level of Service (LOS) is a concept developed to quantify the
degree of comfort (including such elements as travel time, number
of stops, total amount of stopped delay, and impediments caused
by other vehicles) afforded to drivers as they travel through an
intersection or roadway segment. .The 1985 Highway Capacity Manual
includes a methodology for calculating the LOS at two-way stop-
controlled intersections. For these unsignalized intersections,
LOS is based .upon the concept of "Reserve Capacity" (i. e., that
portion of available hourly capacity that is not used). A quali-
tative description of the various service levels associated with
an unsignalized intersection is presented in Table 1. A
quantitative definition of LOS for an unsignalized intersection
is presented in Table 2. The reserve capacity concept applies
only to an individual traffic movement or to shared lane
movements. Once the capacity of all the individual movements has
been calculated and their LOS and expected delays determined, an
overall evaluation of the intersection can be made. Normally,
the movement having the worst LOS defines the overall evaluation,
but this may be tempered by engineering judgement.
Past experience with the unsignalized analysis procedure indi-
cates that this methodology is very conservative in that it tends
to overestimate the magnitude of any potential problems that
might exist. Therefore, the results of any unsignalized inter-
-3-
... .._,.,.,. -
"
.
.
N
t
KRUSE WAY
.
RED LION
DRIVEWAY
/8
( __ ~ .. CD
30~1 I
1-'
W
w'
a:
1-'
rn'
>,
c
~~
W,
1-:
c'
o
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PM PEAK
Figure
2
CHEVRON-SPRINGFIELD. OR
Julv 1987
_/1_
~
[ :"
..,
LOS
A
B
C
D
,
1
L
E
F
.
.
Table 1
GENERAL LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS FOR
UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
-------------------------------------------------
General Description
Average delay per vehicle ranges between 0
and 10 seconds
Nearly all drivers find freedom of operation
Very seldom is there more than one vehicle in
the queue
Average delay per vehicle ranges between 10
and 20 seconds
Some drivers begin to consider the delay an
inconvenience
Occasionally' there is more than one vehicle
in the queue
Average delay per vehicle ranges between 20
and 30 seconds
Many times there is more than one vehicle in
the 'queue
Most drivers feel restricted, but not
objectionably so
Average delay per vehicle ranges between 30
and 40 seconds
Often there is more than one vehicle in the
queue
Drivers feel quite restricted
Represents a condition in which the demand is
near or equal to the probable maximum number
of vehicles that can be accommodated by the
movement
Average delay per vehicle ranges between 40
and 60 seconds
There is almost always more than one vehicle
in the queue
Drivers find the delays to be approaching
intolerable levels
Forced flow
Represents an intersection failure condition
that is caused by geometric and/or
operational constraints external to the
intersection
-5-
.
.
Table 2
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA
for
UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Reserve Capacity
(pcph)
Level of
Service
Expected Delay to
Minor Street Traffic
---------------------------
>400
300-399
200-299
100-199
0- 99
.
A
B
C
D
E
F
Little or no delay
Short traffic delays
Average traffic delays
Long traffic delays
Very long traffic delays
.
.When demand volume exceeds the capacity of the lane, extreme
delays will be encountered with queuing which may cause. severe
congestion affecting other traffic movements in the intersection.
This condition usually warrants improvement to the intersection.
Source: Transportation Research Board. "Highway Capacity
Manual". Special Report 209 (1985)
r
'"
L.
-6-
, "
.
.
section analysis should be reviewed with this thought in mind.
Generally, LOS E is considered to be acceptable for an
unsignalized intersection, although it also indicates that the
need for signalization should be investigated.
All LOS analyses described in this report were performed in
accordance with the procedures described above. Copies of the
analysis forms are contained in project files and are available
for review upon request. In order to assure that this analysis
is based upon worst case conditions, the peak 15 minute period
flow rate during the peak hour was used in the evaluation of all
intersection levels of service. Thus, the analysis reflects
conditions that are only likely to occur for 15 minutes out of
each average weekday. For the remainder of each weekday and
throughout the weekends, traffic conditions within the study
impact area are likely to be better than that described in this
report.
Table 3 summarizes the results of the intersection LOS calcula-
tions for the existing conditions at the Gateway/Kruse Way
intersection and the Gateway Street/Red Lion driveway during the
p.m. peak hour. As this table indicates both intersections are
currently operating at good levels of service.
Table 3
SUMMARY OF SERVICE LEVELS AT KEY INTERSECTIONS
Existing Conditions - P.M. Peak
Intersection
Reserve
Movement LOS Capacity
-------- ------------
WB Left A N.A.
WB Right A N.A.
SB Left A N.A.
EB Left E 73
EB Right A 622
NB Left A 474
!
Gateway/KruseWay
Gateway/Red L'ion D/W
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACTIVITY
Field observations of the study site during the peak one hour
period showed relatively little pedestrian or bicycle activity on
the immediate study area streets. Gateway Street does have an
on-street bike lane and a sidewalk on the western side of the
street.
-7-
,~..-.
i :
I
.
.
[
r
!
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
The evening weekday peak hour impacts of traffic operations in
the study area were analyzed as follows:
o Identify the expected traffic volumes at the proposed
service station facility.
o Development of alternative access locations for the
proposed site.
o Identification of advantages and disadvantages of the
traffic operational characteristics resulting from the
alternative access plans.
A detailed discussion of this methodology and the analysis
results is contained in the remainder of this section.
SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUME~
The assumed trip characteristic estimates are the basis for the
traffic impact analysis in this report. Therefore, special care
has been taken to ensure the reasonableness of these estimates.
The three major components of the trip characteristic estimates
examined in this study are .trip generation (Le.. the number and
type of vehicle trips likely to be generated by the site
development), trip distribution (i.e., the directional
orientation of the site-generated vehicle trips) and trip
assignment (i.e., the specific road segments used by site-
generated traffic). '
Various assumptions need to be made during the development of
each component. As detailed in the following sections, the
assumptions used to develop the trip characteristics for this
study result in conservatively high traffic volume estimates that
are consistent with other transportation planning efforts in the
area.
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation:
An Informational Report. Third Edition, code numbers 844 (Service
Station) and 851 (Convenience Market) were used to estimate the
average weekday and peak hour trip-ends to be generated by the
proposed development. The trip rates stated in the ITE report
have been used as an estimate of the gross number of trips
generated by the proposed development.
Table 4 shows the estimated trips generated at the proposed
site's driveways and on the adjacent street network. Two
-8-
.
.
reductions to the gross number of trips generated by the proposed
development have been made since using the trip rates for each of
the two individual components would have resulted in an unrealis-
tically high estimate of the total project trips. The first
reduction was made to account for the double counting of dual
purpose trips. Surveys at similar Chevron gas/mini-market
developments indicate that at least 80% of the customers buy both
gas and food. This reduction affects the number of trips at the
proposed site driveways.
The other reduction affects the number of trips generated by the
development that are expected to be added to the adjacent street
network. The ITE report states that 60% of the trips expected to
use this type of development are diverted from the existing
traffic stream. Thus, the net trip generation on the adjacent
street network is an estimated 25 vehicles during the p.m. peak
.hour.
Table 4
CHEVRON U.S.A. STATION TRIP GENERATION
Land Use Size
GROSS TRIP TOTAL
AWDVTE Peak Hour Trips
A.M. P.M.
IN OUT IN OU~
580 25 25 25 25
750 30 30 40 40
1330 55 55 65 65
(400) (20) (20) (20) (20)
930 35 35 45 45
(460) (15) (15) (20) (20)
470 20 20 25 25
1. Mini-market 920 gsf
2. Gas station
Customers buying
both food and gas
NET TRIPS @ DRIVEWAYS
Diverted/captured.trips
NET TRIPS ADDED TO
ADJACENT STREET NETWORK
The distribution of site generated trips onto the existing
roadway system within the study impact area was estimated through
examination of the existing traffic movements on Gateway Street.
It is believed that this distribution represents a best estimate
based upon available knowledge of existing and future conditions.
-9-
.
.
ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE ACCESS PLANS
A special component of this investigation involved an analysis of
alternative site access locations. The evaluation of the
alternative access location plans involved examination of the
following access design considerations:
o minimum number of driveways
o the City's minimum requirements for new driveway/
intersection spacing,
o the desired site building and pump locations,
o existing street/driveway configuration,
o existing and future traffic control at the Gateway
Street/~ruse Way intersection, and
The evaluation of the alternative access locations resulted in
the development of the recommended access plans for the proposed
site. The results of the analysis in relation to each of the
design considerations are described in the following paragraphs.
Access Drive Desiqn Considerations
Minimum Number of Drivewavs - From a purely traffic operations
point of view, only one access drive is needed. to accommodate the
entrance and exit of site-generated traffic while still
maintaining an acceptable service level on all adjacent street
segments. This conclusion is supported by the LOS analyses
described in the next section of this report.
However, other factors besides traffic operations must be
considered in determining the number of necessary access drives.
These factors include the effects of the site access design on
internal and external traffic circulation patterns, delivery
truck movements and also the provision of additional access
opportunities for emergency vehicles. This latter factor is
especially important from a fire safety and health safety
viewpoint, and is often a requirement.of officials responsible
for providing these emergency services in a timely manner.
In view of the factors discussed above, it was determined that at
least two access drives should be provided for the site. This is
the minimum number of access drives that can be provided while
still accommodating the access requirement of emergency service
vehicles.
Minimum Requirements for New Drivewav/IntersectionSoacinq - The
City of Springfield requires a minimum spacing for new driveway/
intersection location of 200 feet along arterial streets. Any
-10-
j- . .' . .
I'
I
; .
r
proposed driveway from the subject site on Gateway Street would
not meet this requirement. The existing Red Lion dr'iveway is
located about 65 feet south of the northerly property line and
the subject site has only 180 feet of frontage along Gateway
Street, thus a variance from the spacing requirement would be
necessary for any proposed driveway location along Gateway
Street.
Desired Site Buildina andPumo Locations - The proposed site plan
for the Chevron service station facility shows the desired gas
pumps and building locations which provide for the best
opportunities for a successful operation at this site, assuming a
single access driveway on Gateway Street. The driveway locations
must provide convenient and safe movements of customer vehicles
into and out of the site.
A one-way flow of traffic at the pumps provides the most
efficient movement of traffic on a service station site. With a
single Gateway Street driveway, the pump islands need to be
placed in a northeast/southwest orientation on the site to
provide this flow of traffic on-site most effectively. The
diagonal pump design would eliminate the need for the two
driveway (along the major street) style of service station design
found at every other service. station along Gateway Street near
the proposed Chevron site.
Existina Street/Drivewav Confiauration - It is clear from a
review of both the functional classification of the abutting
streets and also the likely travel routes of approaching traffic
that at least one of the access drives should be located on
Gateway Street. In order to determine the most appropriate
location along Gateway Street for this primary access drive, a
field review was conducted of the physical characteristics of the
street and also the location of other existing access drives.
As a result of this field review, it was found that there is an
existing full access driveway to the Red Lion Hotel that is on
the opposite site of Gateway Street. The centerline of this
driveway is located approximately 95 feet south of the centerline
of the unsignalized Gateway Street/Kruse Way intersection. Field
observations of the traffic volumes at the Red Lion driveway
indicated that there would be sufficient gaps in the Gateway
Street traffic flows to accommodate the projected turn movements
to and from the Chevron station.
The Gateway Street/Kruse Way intersection, as previously
mentioned, is a "T"-shaped intersection with the western leg
missing. The absence of a western leg at this intersection
eliminates the need for a northbound left turn lane in front of
the site. Thus, the center turn lane could provide storage for
left turn movements into the site without significantly impacting
operations at the intersection under stop sign control.
-11-
i'
!
r
:
L
.'
.
.
Traffic Control at the Gatewav Street/Kruse Wav Intersection-
Traffic flow at the existing stop sign control at the Gateway
Street/Kruse Way intersection would not significantly affect the
operations at any proposed Chevron service station access
locations on Gateway Street. The future placement of a traffic
signal at the intersection would, however, cause northbound
traffic to stop and stack-up in front of the site. Therefore, a
single Gateway access located across from the Red Lion driveway
would provide limited accessibility following installation of a
traffic signal. It should be recognized that this signal should
be installed only after traffic conditions warrant a signal
installation.
Access Alternatives
Three alternative access plans were developed following the
review of the site design constraints. The alternatives
consisted of the following general access driveway descriptions:
Alternative' 1 - A single Gateway Street driveway located
opposite the Red Lion driveway. Figure 3 shows the total
traffic volumes at the proposed driveway and the Gateway
Street/Kruse Way intersection. (NOTE: The total volumes
represent the traffic conditions following opening of the
Chevron station without other developments along Kruse Way.)
Alternative 2 - Two driveways located along Gateway Street.
The northerly driveway would be located opposite the Red
Lion driveway and the southerly driveway would be located as
close to the southerly property line as allowed under the
City standards. Figure 4 shows the total traffic volumes at
the proposed driveways and the Gateway Street/Kruse Way
intersection. (NOTE: The total volumes represent the
traffic conditions following opening of the Chevron station
without other developments along Kruse Way.) .
Alternative 3 ~ A single Gateway Street driveway located
five feet North of the South property line plus a Kruse Way
driveway. Figure 5 shows the total traffic volumes at the
proposed driveways and the Gateway Street/Kruse Way
intersection. (NOTE: The total volumes represent the future
traffic conditions following opening of the Chevron station,
plus completion of other developments along Kruse Way.)
Level of Service Calculations
The three access alternatives were examined for the driveway and
intersection levels of service during the p.m. peak hour period.
The capacity analysis methodologies described in the previous
section were again utilized for the stop sign and signalized
control conditions.
-12-
..,
.
.
N
+
KRUSE WAY
. .
RED LION
DRIVEWAY
t_
I-
W
W
a:"
I- .
(/):
>:
<-
~:
w'
I- :
<
<!'
TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES - 1987 PM PEAK
ACCESS ALTERNATIVE 1
CHEVRON-SPRINGFIELD. OR
July 1987
FI~re KJ.
_11_
,....
I
[,
KRUSE WAY
RED LION
DRIVEWAY
,
L
~
w
W
11:'
~'
m:
>,
-c-
~:
w.
~"
-C'
o
TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES - 1987 PM PEAK
ACCESS ALTERNATIVE 2
CHEVRON-SPRINGFIELD, OR
Julv 1987
-14-
r~ure IKf
.'
\ '
.
N
t
RED LION
DRIVEWAY
{4:
"
.
STOP SIGN
/ CONTROL
,
"
...,
w'
w'
0::;
....
CD'
>:
c
~;
w'
~ ~
c.
c:J~
TOTAL FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PM PEAK
ACCESS ALTERNATIVE 3
CHEVRON-SPRINGFIELD. OR
Julv 1987
-15-
Figure 171
5 ~
._. . ~'-., ....
.'
.
.
. .
r
I
I
As shown in Tables 5 & 6 the LOS during the p.m. peak hour will
remain within acceptable levels with the anticipated increase in
traffic at the Gateway/Kruse Way intersection and the alternative
site access locations during the p.m. peak hour. It is imcortant
to note that the Gatewav Street/Kruse Wav intersection. with stoc
sian control, would ocerate within accectable LOS even with the
future traffic volumes. Also, the anticioated future traffic
volumes on Kruse Wav used in this analvsis do not meet anv of the
traffic volume warrants for sianalization.
Table 5
SUMMARY OF SERVICE LEVELS AT KEY INTERSECTIONS
Existing + Si te Condi tions - P.M. Peak
Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Reserve Reserve
Intersection Movement LOS Capacity LOS Capacity
------------ -------- ------------ ------------
Gateway/Kruse Way WB Left A N.A. A N.A.
i WB Right A N.A. A N.A.
'-
SB Left A N.A. A N.A.
Gateway/North D/W WB Left E 60 E 65
WB Right A 629 A 627
SB Left A 570 A 585
NB Left A 485 A 481
EB Left E 58 E 70
EB Right A 716 A 730
Gateway/South D/W WB Left E 60 E 65
WB Right A 629 A 627
SB Left A 570 A 585
-16-