HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence PWE 1/22/2004
, -
.
.
Memorandum
City of Springfield
Subject:
January 22, 2004
Jim Donovan, Planner III
Gary McKenney, P.E., Transportation Planning Engineer
MountainGate Subdivision Phase IV, SUB2003-00062
Date:
To:
From:
The Transportation Division has reviewed the materials provided with the subject application.
The recommended findings and conditions outlined below are provided for your use in preparing
the land-use decision.
General
Finding: Construction of the proposed subdivision will require completion of MountainGate
Subdivision Phases I and II.
Condition: All relevant conditions of approval contained in the MountainGate
Subdivision Master Plan decision and subsequent MountainGate Subdivision Phases I
and II decision shall apply to the subject application.
Finding: As part of the MountainGate Master Plan approval process the applicant submitted a
Traffic Impact Study (TIS), which was based on assumptions about the type, intensity and timing
of developments that could reasonably be anticipated on the site. The TIS assumed land
comprising the subdivision would be developed as single-family housing as proposed. Based on
ITE Land Use Code 210 (Single-Family Detached Housing) trip generation ITom this subdivision
is estimatcd to be as follows:
. A verage Weekday = 130 dwelling units x 9.57 trips per dwelling units = 1,244 trips
. PM Peak Hour = 130 dwelling units x 1.01 trips per dwelling units = 131 trips
In addition, the assumed development would generate pedestrian and bicycle trips. According to
the "Household" survey done by LCOG in 1994, 12.6 percent of household trips are made by
bicycle or walking and 1.8 percent are by transit bus. These trips may have their origins or
destinations at a variety ofland uses, including this use. Pedestrian and bicycle trips create the
need for sidewalks, pedestrian crossing signals, crosswalks, bicycle parking and bicycle lanes.
Finding: The capacity of existing and planned transportation facilities is consistent with the
approved MountainGate Master Plan and adequate to accommodate additional trips that would
be generated by the proposed development.
Subdivision Access and Circulation
Finding: Installation of driveways on a street increases the number of traffic conflict points. The
greater number of conflict points increases the probability of traffic crashes. Effective ways to
reduce the probability of traffic crashes include: reducing the number of driveways, increasing
distances between intersections and driveways and establishing adequate vision clearance where
driveways intersect streets. Each of these techniques pennits a longer, lesBSAm:: I V ED
distance for the motorist, reduces the number and difficulty of decisions dR~~ n
_ L'Df2- ~
By: [--1-2:-04-'
SUB2003-00062
January 22, 2004
Page 2 of 2
.
.
contributes to increased traffic safety, SDC 32.080( I) (a) stipulates that each parcel is entitled to
"an approved access to a public street."
Finding: Access to subdivision lots is proposed via driveways onto the various subdivision
streets. The approved Mountain Gate Master plan acknowledges that in numerous cases direct
access onto MountainGate Drive - a collector street - will be necessary. The subject application
. .
is consistent with the adopted Master Plan in that regard
Finding: Access to Lots 122 through 128 is proposed via a 480-foot cul-'de-sac ending in a
"hammerhead" turnaround. SDC 32.020 (5) specifies that, "A cul-de-sac, excluding the bulb,
shall have a minimum length of 65 feet and shall have a maximum length of 400 feet.' A cul-
de-sac shall terminate with a circular turnaround, or bulb, with a minimum diameter of right of
way and paving as shown in Table 32-1." Approval of the proposed cul-de-sac design would
require processing of a Modification of Provisions to address the excessive lengtn, and a
Variance to address the end treatment as provided for in SDC Article 11.
Condition: In accordance with SDC Article 11, the applicant must submit an application
for a Modification of Provisions to address the proposed cul-de-sac length and a
Variance application to address the proposed non-standard cul-de-sac end treatment.
Finding: Access to the following lots is proposed to be shared via multiple panhandle driveway
arrangements:
I) Lots 25, 26, 27 and 28,
2) Lots 44, 45 and 46, and
3) Lots 13 and 14
Condition: Execute and record a joint-use access and maintenance agreements over all
areas of shared access proposed for:
1) Lots 25, 26, 27 and 28,
2) Lots 44, 45 and 46, and
3) Lots 13 and 14
Condition: Provide and maintain adequate clear vision triangle at the corners of all
panhandle driveways per SDC 32.070.
Please provide a copy of the draft decisioll for lilY review prior to issuillg the filial decision.