Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-07-16 Planning Board Supplemental Materials (40) llenassa &Assoclaftxs Inc- RIAN ef. 6488 July 15, 2013 Mr. Joseph D. Peznola, P.E. Principal-Branch Manager Marlborough Hancock Associates, Inc. 315 Elm Street Marlborough, MA 01752 Re: Traffic Engineering Peer Review Pentucket Bank at Butcher Boy Market Place North Andover, Massachusetts Dear Joe: Vanasse & Associates, Inc. (VAI) has completed a review of the supplemental materials submitted on behalf of Angus Realty Corporation (the "Applicant") in support of the proposed addition of Pentucket Bank to the existing Butcher Boy Marketplace located at 1077 Osgood Street (Route 125) in North Andover, Massachusetts (hereafter referred to as the "Project"). The supplemental materials were prepared in response to the comments that were raised in VAI's March 29, 2013 review letter concerning the November 27,2012 Traffic Impact and Access Study and consisted of a letter and supporting materials prepared by Bayside Engineering (Bayside) and dated June 18, 2013. Responses to our comments concerning the March 15, 2013 Site Layout Plan prepared by Lynnfield Engineering, Inc. in support of the Project have not been received. Based on our review of the supplemental information submitted in support of the Project, the Applicant has generally addressed the comments that were raised in our March 29, 2013 review letter concerning the November 27, 2012 Traffic Impact and Access Study. We have indicated specific areas that should be reviewed and confirmed by the Applicant's engineer (drive-through window facility vehicle queue calculations) and/or incorporated into the Site Plans for the Project. Further, as stated herein, additional analyses may be required with respect to access and on-site circulation pending receipt of written responses to our comments on the Site Layout Plan. For reference, listed below are the comments that were raised in our March 29, 2013 review letter that required additional information or analysis, followed by a summary of Applicant's response. NOVEMBER 27,2012 TRAFFIC IMPACT AND ACCESS STUDY General Comment. In accordance with Massachusetts General Law, the engineer should provide a letter attesting that the November 2012 TIAS was prepared under the responsible charge of a Professional Engineer duly registered in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and with the requisite experience in the fields of Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning. Mr.Joseph D. Peznola, P.E. July 15, 2013 Page 2 of 9 Response: The November 2012 Traffic Impact and Access Study was prepared under the responsible charge of Mr. Kenneth P. Cram, P.E., Massachusetts Registered Professional Engineer No. 36663, Traffic. No further response required. Comment: In addition, the Applicant's engineer should provide a determination as to the applicability of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) as it relates to the Project and, specifically, the need to file a Notice of Project Change. Further, given that the Project site will be accessed from Route 125, a State Highway under the jurisdiction of MassDOT, the Project will require the issuance of a State Highway Access Permit for both the proposed use and the driveway modifications. The Applicant's engineer should provide an update on coordination with MassDOT with respect to the State Highway Access Permit. Response: The Applicant's engineer stated that the Project does not exceed the Transportation thresholds of MEPA that would require the filing of an NPC. An amended State Highway Access Permit will be required for the Project from MassDOT for access to Route 125 and for any associated improvements within the State Highway Layout. The Applicant's engineer has indicated that the Applicant will apply for the required permits from MassDOT upon successful completion of the local approval process. No further response required. Existine Conditions Traffic Volumes and Data Collection Comment: The data collection and seasonal adjustment (none required) were completed in accordance with standard Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning practices; however, we note the following discrepancies that should be corrected: 1. The traffic counts were preformed after public schools were closed. As such and given that the North Andover High School is located off Route 125 to the south of the Project site, a supplemental ATR should be conducted on Route 125 while public schools are in session in order to validate the traffic counts that form the basis of the November 2012 TIAS. Alternatively, a supplemental TMC could be conducted at the Route 125/ Route 133 intersection. Response: Supplemental manual turning movement and vehicle classifications counts were conducted at the intersection of Route 125 at Route 133 in April 2013 while public schools were in regular session, with an accompanying automatic traffic recorder count conducted on Route 125 in the vicinity of the Project site. Based on a review of the supplemental traffic count data, it was reported that the peak-hour traffic volumes at the Route 125/Route 133 intersection were comparable to those collected in June 2012 after the conclusion of the 2011-2012 school year. The supplemental traffic count data (April 2013) was used by the Applicant's engineer to perform the refined traffic analyses that accompanied the June 18, 2013 response to comments letter. G:\6488 North Andover,MA\Letters\Pentucket Bank Supplmental Traffic Review 071513 docx %A1 Mr. Joseph D. Peznola, P.E. July 15,2013 Page 3 of 9 We are in agreement that the peak-hour traffic count data obtained in April 2013 is comparable to the June 2012 data and note that the average weekday daily traffic volume along Route 125 was also found to be generally consistent with that recorded in July 2012 (approximately 17,100 vehicles per day (vpd)). It is also noted that the Saturday traffic volume (24-hours) recorded in April 2013 was significantly higher than that recorded in July 2012 (15,365 vpd vs. 11,800 vpd); however, the Saturday midday peak-hour traffic volumes were found to be comparable. No further response required. Comment. 2. It appears that the raw traffic count data was reduced in some instances in order to balance traffic volumes between intersections, including the through traffic volumes that conflict with vehicles entering and exiting the Project site. Balancing between intersections should be accomplished by identifying the highest traffic volume by direction between intersections and then adjusting the remaining traffic volumes upward as necessary. Revised traffic volume networks and analyses should be provided for all peak hours and analysis conditions (Existing, No-Build and Build). Response: The Applicant's engineer revised the peak-hour traffic volume networks to use the April 2013 traffic count data obtained at the Route 125/Route 133 intersection and balanced volumes between intersections by holding the higher volume directional flow. No further response required. Future Conditions No-Build Conditions Comment: A review of historic traffic growth information for the Town of North Andover indicates that the 0.5 percent per year background traffic growth rate is appropriate for use in establishing base future traffic volume conditions within the study area. We are in agreement with the methodology that was used to develop the No-Build condition traffic volumes. The Applicant's engineer should provide the traffic volume networks and any associated calculations related to the trip-generation and trip assignments for the identified specific development projects by others. Further, the No-Build condition traffic volume networks should be revised to reflect the corrections to the Existing conditions traffic volumes as stated previously. Response: The Applicant's engineer provided the traffic volume networks for the identified specific development projects by others and included revised No-Build condition peak-hour traffic volume networks based on the April 2013 traffic count data. We did note minor discrepancies in the resulting traffic volumes of less than 10 vehicles, a deviation that would not result in a material change in the analysis results or the overall findings or conclusions of the supplemental evaluation. No further response required. G:\6488 North Andover,MA\Letters\Pentucket Bank Supplmental Traffic Review 071513 docx %AI Mr. Joseph D. Peznola, P.E. July 15, 2013 Page 4 of 9 Build Conditions Comment: We are in agreement with the methodology that was used to develop the anticipated traffic characteristics of the Project and the resulting values, and we are in general agreement with the trip distribution pattern that was used to assign Project-related trips to the roadway network. We note that the Applicant's engineer used the 8`h Edition of"Trip Generation"published by ITE vs. the 91h Edition which was available at the time that the November 2012 TIAS was prepared. That said, use of the 9`h Edition of"Trip Generation" would result in similar or lower trip estimates for the Project. Further, we note that the Applicant's engineer did not account for `pass-by" trips, or motorists that are currently travelling along Route 125 for other purposes that will patronize the Project in conjunction with their travels and would not be new trips on Route 125 as a result of the Project. Such trips could account for up to 47 percent of the traffic associated with the Project. The Applicant's engineer should provide the trip assignment networks illustrating the assignment of Project-related traffic on to the roadway network. Further, revised Build condition traffic volume networks should be provided to reflect the corrections to the Existing and No-Build condition traffic volumes as stated previously. Response: The Applicant's engineer provided updated trip-generation calculations for the Project using the 9th Edition of"Trip Generation" and incorporated a 25 pass-by trip rate into the calculations to reflect traffic associated with bank customers that may already be travelling along Route 125 for other purposes or patronizing another use within the Project site that will also visit the bank in conjunction with their trip. Trip-assignment networks for Project-related traffic were provided along with revised Build condition peak-hour traffic volume networks as requested. No further response required. Traffic Operations Analysis Comment: The traffic operations analysis was completed using the appropriate methodologies and should be updated to reflect the revised traffic volumes requested as a part of this review. Further, the Applicant's engineer should provide a summary of level-of-service and vehicle queue by approach/lane group for each study intersection and analysis condition. This information can be provided in a table or in graphical format. Response: Revised traffic operations analyses were provided for 2013 Existing, 2018 No-Build and 2018 Build conditions using the updated peak-hour traffic volumes. This analysis has indicated that the Project will have a measureable but minor impact on traffic operations at the study intersections. The intersection of Route 125 at Route 133 was shown to continue to operate at a level-of-service of"C" or better during the peak periods with the addition of Project-related traffic (no change over No-Build conditions). Left-turn movements exiting the Butcher Boy Marketplace driveway were shown to operate at or over capacity during the peak hours (defined as a level-of-service of"E" or"17", respectively) independent of the Project, with Project-related impacts defined as an increase in vehicle queuing of between G:\6488 North Andover,MA\Letters\Pentucket Bank Supplmental Traffic Review 071513 docx %AI Mr.Joseph D. Peznola,P.E. July 15, 2013 Page 5 of 9 one (1) and four (4) vehicles along the driveway internal to the Marketplace. No Further Response Required. Drive-Through Window Vehicle Queue Calculations Comment: The Applicant's engineer should provide the detailed statistical vehicle queue calculations for the ATM and teller lanes for the peak arrival period (Saturday midday peak-hour with 50 vehicles arriving). The analysis should be based on the number of arriving vehicles during the peak arrival period that will use the ATM and teller lanes and using the observed service flow rates of two (2) minutes per transaction for the ATM lane and three (3) minutes per transaction for each teller lane. In addition, the queue length should be evaluated based on both a 20 and 25 foot vehicle spacing in order to determine the adequacy of the design of the drive-through facility. Response: A statistical vehicle queue analysis was completed using data obtained from Pentucket Bank's Westgate branch in Haverhill. Based on this data, the table below summarizes the projected transactions and calculated vehicle queue for the drive-through facility based on the queue calculation worksheets attached to the supplemental assessment. Teller Lane ATM Lane Projected Projected 95`h 95th Projected Percentile Projected Percentile Demand Queue Demand Queue Time Period vehicles vehicles vehicles vehicles Weekday AM Peak Hour 5 2 7 2 Weekday PM Peak-Hour 10 4 9 3 Saturday Midday peak-Hour 4 1 13 6 We note that the narrative reporting the results of the queue analysis and the associated methodology is not consistent with the information and results presented on the queue calculation worksheets and should be reviewed the Applicant's engineer. Further,the Applicant's engineer did not provide information to substantiate that the Westgate branch is comparable to the proposed bank with respect to the anticipated number of transactions and the associated traffic volumes given the direct application of observations at the branch to substantiate the vehicle queue calculations for the Project. The above being said, using the projected volume of traffic entering the bank during the peak arrival period (50 vehicles during the Saturday midday peak-hour) and assuming: i) 50 percent of customers use the drive-through facility (25 vehicles) with drive-through customers distributed as follows: 35 percent in teller lane 1 (9 vehicles),35 percent in teller lane 2 (9 vehicles) and 30 percent in the ATM lane (7 vehicles); and ii) an average transaction time of 3 minutes per customer (teller and ATM);yields the following values: G,\6488 North Andover,MA\Letters\Pentucket Bank Supplmental Traffic Review 071513 docx %AI Mr. Joseph D. Peznola,P.E. July 15, 2013 Page 6 of 9 ➢ Teller Lanes: — Average Queue: 1 vehicle per lane — 95th Percentile Queue: 3 vehicles per lane ➢ ATM Lane: — Average Queue: 1 vehicle — 95'h Percentile Queue: 2 vehicles Given that the proposed drive-through window facility can accommodate a vehicle queue of between 4 to 5 vehicles per lane without impeding access or on-site circulation, it appears that the drive-through facility is appropriately designed to accommodate the projected vehicle queuing. No further response required. Sieht Distance Comment: Sight distance measurements (stopping and intersection sight distance) should be provided for the Butcher Boy Marketplace driveway intersections completed in accordance with American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)] standards in order to demonstrate that the intersections can continue to operate in a safe manner. The sight distance evaluation should be based on the measured 85`h percentile vehicle travel speed along Route 125 (use 50 mph). Response: Vehicle travel speed measurements were performed along Route 125 in conjunction with the supplemental automatic traffic recorded counts in April 2013. Based on these measurements, it was determined that the average measured 85th percentile vehicle travel speed along Route 125 in the vicinity of the Project site is 44 miles per hour (mph) northbound and 47 mph southbound. For context, the posted speed limit is 35 mph. The measured 85th percentile vehicle travel speeds were used to assess lines of sight at the driveways serving the Butcher Boy Marketplace in accordance with AASHTO standards. The Applicant's engineer documented sight lines at and approaching the Butcher Boy Marketplace driveways that exceed 500 feet, where a minimum sight distance of 425 is required for safe operation assuming an approach speed of 50 mph. As such, this analysis concluded that the driveways serving the Butcher Boy Marketplace are appropriately designed and located to function in safe manner. No further response required. 'A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th Edition;American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO);2011. GA6488 North Andover,MA\Letters\Pentucket Bank Supplmental Traffic Review 071513 docx %AI Mr. Joseph D. Peznola,P.E. July 15, 2013 Page 7 of 9 Recommendations Comment: We are in agreement with the recommendations that were provided as a part of the November 2012 TIAS and would suggest that the following additional recommendations be considered for the Project: 1. Driveways and circulating roadways serving the Project site should be a minimum of 24 feet in width where two-way travel is to be accommodated and a minimum of 16 feet in width for one-way travel. 2. One-Way, Do Not Enter and turn restriction signs should be provided within the Project site in order to regulate and direct traffic in a one-way circulation pattern (counter-clockwise) around the bank building. 3. Multiple conflicts are created at the entrance driveways to the Project site that have the potential to impede access to both the proposed bank and the Butcher Boy Marketplace, particularly at the right-turn entrance proximate to Route 125. It is recommended that this intersection be eliminated and that the drive-through window facility be relocated to the north side of the bank building so that all traffic entering and exiting the bank is directed to the east end of the Project site (location of current exit from the bank). 4. All Signs and pavement markings to be installed within the Project site shall conform to the applicable specifications of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).2 5. Where provided, centerline pavement markings shall consist of a double-yellow line in accordance with the centerline pavement marking standards of the MUTCD. 6. Signs and landscape features proposed along the Project frontage and adjacent to existing and proposed driveways should be designed, constructed and maintained so as not to impede sight lines to and from the Project site driveway. Response: With the exception of the relocation of the drive-through window facility to the north side of the bank building, the Site Layout Plan included with the June 18, 2013 letter and the accompanying narrative therein incorporated or indicated concurrence with the above recommendations. We would suggest that the Site Plan include a note indicating that all signs and pavement markings to be installed within the Project site shall conform the applicable standards of the MUTCD. No further response required. 2Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices(MUTCD);Federal Highway Administration;Washington,DC;2009. G:\6488 North Andover,MMLettersTentucket Bank Supplmental Traffic Review 071513 docx %AI Mr.Joseph D. Peznola,P.E. July 15, 2013 Page 8 of 9 MARCH 15,2013 SITE LAYOUT PLAN The following comments are offered with respect to our review of the March 15, 2013 Site Layout Plan prepared Lynnfield Engineering, Inc. in support of the Project. 1. A truck turning analysis should be completed for the Project site using the AutoTurn® or similar analysis software. The turning analysis should be completed for the following design vehicles: SU-30/40 (small delivery/moving vehicle and trash/recycling vehicle) and the Town of North Andover Fire Department design vehicle. 2. The location of the loading/delivery area should be indicated on the site plan. A formal loading area is not necessary; however, the Applicant's engineer should indicate where UPS/FedEx, armored car, and other such deliveries will be made given the internal circulation constraints within the Project site as currently designed. 3. As stated previously, it is recommended that right-turn entrance to the bank site and the associated internal intersection be eliminated, and that the drive-through window facility be relocated to the north side of the bank building so that all traffic entering and exiting the bank is directed to the east end of the Project site (location of current exit from the bank). 4. Driveways and circulating roadways within the Project site should be a minimum of 16-feet in width for one-way travel and 24-feet in width for two-way travel. 5. The handicapped accessible parking space should be relocated to be adjacent to the proposed bank building. If this is not possible and if it is determined by the Building Inspector that the handicapped space does not need to be located immediately adjacent to the bank building, appropriate accommodations need to be provided to permit the safe crossing of the driveway and circulating aisle between the handicapped space and the entrance to the bank. Response: Written responses to our comments concerning the Site Layout Plan have not been received and remain outstanding. Resolution of these comments may require further refinement to the Site Layout Plan and, potentially, the traffic analysis with specific regard to vehicle queuing and on-site circulation. SUMMARY VAI has completed a review of the supplemental materials submitted on behalf of Angus Realty Corporation in support of the proposed addition of Pentucket Bank to the existing Butcher Boy Market Place located at 1077 Osgood Street (Route 125) in North Andover, Massachusetts. The supplemental materials were prepared in response to the comments that were raised in VAI's March 29, 2013 review letter concerning the November 27, 2012 Traffic Impact and Access Study prepared by Bayside in support of the Project. Responses to our comments concerning the March 15, 2013 Site Layout Plan prepared Lynnfield Engineering,Inc. in support of the Project have not been received. Based on our review of the supplemental information submitted in support of the Project, the Applicant has generally addressed the comments that were raised in our March 29, 2013 review letter concerning G:\6488 North Andover,MA\Letters\Pentucket Bank Supplmental Traffic Review 071513 docx %A1 Mr. Joseph D. Peznola, P.E. July 15, 2013 Page 9 of 9 the November 27, 2012 Traffic Impact and Access Study. We have indicated specific areas that should be reviewed and confirmed by the Applicant's engineer (drive-through window facility vehicle queue calculations) and/or incorporated into the Site Plans for the Project. Further, as stated herein, additional analyses may be required with respect to access and on-site circulation pending receipt of written responses to our comments on the Site Layout Plan. This concludes our review of the supplemental materials that have been submitted to date in support of the Project. If you should have any questions regarding our review,please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ;` e4y . E OCl , INC. x 3Dirk,P.E., PTOE, FITE Principal JSD/j sd cc: File G:\6488 North Andover,MA\LetterAPentucket Bank Supplmental Traffic Review 071513 docx %A1