Loading...
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-